header-logo header-logo

18 September 2009
Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Grave interference with family life

An Afghani wife from Pakistan has won the right to join her refugee husband in the UK because refusal by the Appeal Immigration Tribunal violated her Art 8 rights.

In refusing entry the Appeal Immigration Tribunal (AIT) said that under the Immigration Rules a wife could not join a husband who had limited leave to stay in the UK if they marry abroad after he came to seek asylum. The wife appealed on the grounds that it unlawfully interfered with family life under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The AIT acknowledged that the Immigration Rules discriminate unfairly against such refugees particularly when other classes of migrants are not under such disability but it warned against using Art 8 to ‘correct perceived faults in legislative provisions’.

Richard Cahill, solicitor at Cahill De Fonseka and immigration specialist said that the lack of provisions for post-flight spouse to join recognised refugees in the UK was based on ‘concerns about speculative asylum claims’ and ‘entry clearance applications based on marriages of convenience’.

The Court

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

Clarke Willmott—Megan Bradbury

Clarke Willmott—Megan Bradbury

Corporate team welcomes paralegal in Southampton

Howard Kennedy—Paul Moran

Howard Kennedy—Paul Moran

London firm strengthens real estate team with partner appointment

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll