header-logo header-logo

17 May 2013
Issue: 7560 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of SM and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (on the application of SR and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Coram Children’s Legal Centre intervening) [2013] EWHC 1144 (Admin), [2013] All ER (D) 78 (May)
 

In finding that the “discretionary leave” policy of the secretary of state was lawful, the court held that it was a well established principle that the duty under s 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 applied, not only to how children were looked after in the UK while decisions about their immigration were being made, but also to the decisions themselves.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

mfg Solicitors—Hayley Pearce & Lauren Williams

mfg Solicitors—Hayley Pearce & Lauren Williams

Law firm mfg Solicitors announces promotions at Ludlow office

Womble Bond Dickinson—Richard Sharpe

Womble Bond Dickinson—Richard Sharpe

Womble Bond Dickinson appoints partner in Leeds residential team

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners adds six to partnership in record year for partner promotions

NEWS
Calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14 have been renewed, with the Bar Council arguing the current threshold criminalises children too early and risks pushing them towards lifelong offending
The legal profession's AI challenge extends far beyond fabricated case citations, according to a warning about the next phase of technological risk
Law firms should use the transition period before the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) assumes anti-money laundering (AML) supervision to strengthen governance and compliance, experts have warned
Cross-border disputes increasingly demand creative approaches to gathering evidence, with litigators needing to look beyond traditional letters of request
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified the distinction between contracts of 'indefinite' and 'perpetual' duration, with potentially significant implications for commercial drafting
back-to-top-scroll