header-logo header-logo

Immigration

25 July 2014
Issue: 7616 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Qongwane and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (the application of Singh (India)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] All ER (D) 167 (Jul)

Paragraph 353B of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC395 did not confer a discretion on the secretary of state. It was implicit in s 84(1)(f) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 that the secretary of state might exercise discretions that related to immigration and asylum other than those conferred by the rules. The discretion not to remove a migrant with no rights to be in the UK was not one that was subject to any rule; it was a discretion exercised outside those rules. Paragraph 353B did not of itself create an obligation on the secretary of state to carry out a review in the circumstances to which it referred. A decision by the secretary of state that there were no exceptional circumstances that justified a finding that removal was no longer appropriate could not be appealed under s 84(1)(f) of the Act.

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll