header-logo header-logo

Immigration

15 October 2009
Issue: 7389 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Anam) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWHC 2496 (Admin), [2009] All ER (D) 127 (Oct)

The case involved a challenge to a mentally ill Bangladeshi national’s detention pending deportation, with reference to the secretary of state’s policy contained in ch 55 of the Enforcement Instructions Guidance, entitled “Detention and Temporary Release”, not to detain mentally ill persons pending deportation, save in “very exceptional circumstances”.

The court ruled that although a person’s mental illness meant a strong presumption in favour of release would operate, there were other factors which had to go into the balance in a decision to detain.

The phrase “very exceptional circumstances” referred to at para 55.10 had to be construed in the context of the policy, namely that it was a policy which provided guidance for the detention of all those liable to removal, not merely foreign national prisoners.
 

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 dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
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
back-to-top-scroll