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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll