header-logo header-logo

16 October 2015
Issue: 7672 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Immigration

BG (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 960, [2015] All ER (D) 380 (Jul)

The respondent’s application for an extension of leave to remain in the UK had been refused, but his successful appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) had been upheld by the Upper Tribunal. The Court of Appeal allowed the secretary of state’s appeal as, on the facts, the respondent had not satisfied para 276ADE(v) of the Immigration Rules because, being aged 25 at the time of his application, he had not been “under 25 years”.

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

Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin

Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin

Boodle Hatfield welcomes new employment partner, Tom McLaughlin

Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov

Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov

National specialist pensions law firm strengthens team with three new appointments

Jurit—Christian Abletshauser

Jurit—Christian Abletshauser

Jurit appoints Christian Abletshauser to lead family law practice

NEWS
Burges Salmon appoints Benn Richards to strengthen Contentious Insolvency offering
A High Court decision has clarified that a home may be unfit for human habitation not only where conditions endanger health or safety, but also where they seriously undermine comfort and convenience

A longer time limit for employment tribunal claims, new charity law thresholds, property tribunal recruitment and appellate guidance on small-claims costs feature in the latest Civil Way round-up

A recent High Court ruling could make issue estoppel considerably more complex in cross-border litigation, requiring parties to consider the foreign law governing the underlying claim
The Supreme Court has overturned Cheshire West’s bright-line test for deprivation of liberty, replacing it with a broader, more contextual assessment that gives greater weight to an individual’s wishes, feelings and apparent consent
back-to-top-scroll