header-logo header-logo

Immigration

12 August 2016
Issue: 7711 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Secretary of State for the Home Department v ZAT and others (United National High Commissioner for Refugees and AIRE Centre, intervening) [2016] EWCA Civ 810, [2016] All ER (D) 22 (Aug)

The Court of Appeal held that the Upper Tribunal had erred in its approach to the test required to permit the processes and procedures of European Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) 604/2013 (the Dublin III Regulation) to be bypassed because of the right to family life, under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, at the initial procedural stages in the determination of which member state was responsible for processing an application for asylum.

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

Birketts—Michael Conway

Birketts—Michael Conway

IP partner joins team in Bristol to lead branding and trade marks practice

Blake Morgan—Daniel Church

Blake Morgan—Daniel Church

Succession and tax team welcomes partner inLondon

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec

Firm appoints senior associate to lead Manchester city centre team

NEWS
Ministers’ proposals to raise funds by seizing interest on lawyers’ client account schemes could ‘cause firms to close’, solicitors have warned
Pension sharing orders (PSOs) have quietly reached their 25th anniversary, yet remain stubbornly underused. Writing in NLJ this week, Joanna Newton of Stowe Family Law argues that this neglect risks long-term financial harm, particularly for women
A school ski trip, a confiscated phone and an unauthorised hotel-room entry culminated in a pupil’s permanent exclusion. In this week's issue of NLJ, Nicholas Dobson charts how the Court of Appeal upheld the decision despite acknowledged procedural flaws
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
back-to-top-scroll