header-logo header-logo

Immigration

25 July 2014
Issue: 7616 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Qongwane and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (the application of Singh (India)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] All ER (D) 167 (Jul)

Paragraph 353B of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC395 did not confer a discretion on the secretary of state. It was implicit in s 84(1)(f) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 that the secretary of state might exercise discretions that related to immigration and asylum other than those conferred by the rules. The discretion not to remove a migrant with no rights to be in the UK was not one that was subject to any rule; it was a discretion exercised outside those rules. Paragraph 353B did not of itself create an obligation on the secretary of state to carry out a review in the circumstances to which it referred. A decision by the secretary of state that there were no exceptional circumstances that justified a finding that removal was no longer appropriate could not be appealed under s 84(1)(f) of the Act.

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll