header-logo header-logo

29 April 2010
Issue: 7415 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of Kiana and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] All ER (D) 110 (Apr)

Section 4(2) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 contained no power for the secretary of state to provide subsistence only support to a failed asylum seeker.  The s 4 regime had to be contrasted with that under s 95 where a wider power was conferred on the secretary of state to provide support for asylum seekers and dependants of asylum seekers. Section 95 allowed for forms of support other than accommodation, on a standalone basis - that was not the case under s 4.

There was no suggestion that Parliament had intended the forms of support available under s 4 and s 95 were to be provided on a similar basis. Further, had s 4 conferred on the secretary of state a power to provide subsistence only support, the 1999 Act would be expected to provide an express right of appeal against a refusal to provide such support—it did not.

Moreover, s 4(2) of the

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll