header-logo header-logo

Immigration

03 March 2017
Issue: 7736 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Agyarko) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (on the application of Ikuga) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 11, [2017] All ER (D) 168 (Feb

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of two appellant foreign nationals from a decision in which the respondent secretary of state had refused the appellants’ applications for leave to remain under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules and decided that there were no exceptional circumstances to warrant the grant of leave to remain outside the Rules, under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In so doing it also upheld the decision of the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) which had refused to grant them permission to seek judicial review and the decision of the Court of Appeal which had dismissed the appellants’ appeals. In so doing, it considered, among other things, the nature and application of the phrase “insurmountable obstacles”, as used in para EX.1 of Appendix FM to the Rules.

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