header-logo header-logo

08 March 2024 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 8062 / Categories: Features , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Tracking the Rwanda Bill (Pt 2)

162777
In the second part of a special NLJ series, Michael Zander KC considers whether the UK must follow interim measures imposed by the Strasbourg court
  • Analyses the House of Lords Committee stage of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, particularly regarding the government’s position on whether it must follow the ECtHR’s interim measures.

The politically charged question of whether the UK is required to follow interim decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) was given serious attention on 19 February during the House of Lords Committee stage of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.

The government’s position, advanced by Lord Stewart of Dirleton, Advocate General for Scotland, was based on the generally accepted proposition that international law is only binding on UK courts if translated into UK law. But that does not dispose of the issue since all countries are required to follow international law.

Clause 5 of the Bill deals with ECtHR interim measures relating to the intended removal of a person

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll