header-logo header-logo

24 June 2010
Issue: 7423 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Immigration—Asylum—Removal

MS (Palestinian Territories) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 25, [2010] All ER (D) 116 (Jun)

Lord Saville, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Collins and Sir John Dyson SCJ, 16 June 2010

There is no right of appeal against an immigration decision under s 82(2)(h) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act on the ground that the country or territory stated in the notice of the decision is not one that would satisfy the requirements of para 8(1)(c) of Sch 2 to the Immigration Act 1971 (IA 1971).

Stephen Knafler QC and Duran Seddon (instructed by Refugee and Migrant Justice) for the appellant. Tim Eicke and John-Paul Waite (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the respondent.

The appellant was born in Gaza in 1985. He arrived in the UK in April 2007. Thereafter he claimed asylum and protection under the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention). His claims were rejected and he was served with a notice to remove him from the UK.

The notice stated that if he did not

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll