Last Updated: Wednesday, 23 January 2019, 15:06 GMT
Latest Refworld Updates for United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland RSS feed

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - flag United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Selected filters: Legal Information
Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 3,354 results
HB (Kurds) Iran CG [2018] UKUT 00430 (IAC)

“whether a failed asylum seeker of Kurdish ethnicity will be at risk of persecution on return”

14 December 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - Kurd - Returnees | Countries: Iran, Islamic Republic of - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

ES (s82 NIA 2002; negative NRM) Albania [2018] UKUT 00335 (IAC)

1. Following the amendment to s 82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 ('the 2002 Act'), effective from 20 October 2014, a previous decision made by the Competent Authority within the National Referral Mechanism (made on the balance of probabilities) is not of primary relevance to the determination of an asylum appeal, despite the decisions of the Court of Appeal in AS (Afghanistan) v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 1469 and SSHD v MS (Pakistan) [2018] EWCA Civ 594. 2. The correct approach to determining whether a person claiming to be a victim of trafficking is entitled to asylum is to consider all the evidence in the round as at the date of hearing, applying the lower standard of proof. 3. Since 20 October 2014, there is also no right of appeal on the basis that a decision is not in accordance with the law and the grounds of appeal are limited to those set out in the amended s 82 of the 2002 Act.

29 October 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Social group persecution - Standard of proof - Trafficking in persons | Countries: Albania - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

AS (Guinea) Appellant - and – Secretary of State for the Home Department Respondent - and – United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Intervener

The appeal raises two points of principle: first, the standard of proof applicable to the determination of whether a person qualifies for the status of a stateless person as defined in the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons ("the 1954 Convention”); and secondly, the relevance of a finding that a person is stateless to an assessment carried out pursuant to paragraph 390A of the Immigration Rules.

12 October 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Proof of nationality - Standard of proof - Statelessness | Countries: Guinea - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The Queen on the application of:1) Hemmati; 2)Khalili;3) Abdulkadir; 4) Mohammed (Appellants) - and - The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) and Between The Queen on the application of SS (Respondent) -and- The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant)

The principal issues in the appeals concern the meaning and effect of Article 2(n) and Article 28 of Dublin III ("Article 2(n)" and "Article 28", respectively), which relate to the detention of an individual for the purpose of transfer to another Member State under that Regulation. Mr Hemmati and Mr Khalili also raise a distinct issue regarding whether Garnham J was right to hold that their detention was lawful by application of the usual principles of domestic law first adumbrated in Re Hardial Singh [1984] 1 WLR 704 and rehearsed in later authorities such as R (I) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 888 and Lumba v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] 1 AC 245 ("the Hardial Singh principles").

4 October 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2013 Dublin III Regulation (EU) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Prison or detention conditions | Countries: Afghanistan - Austria - Bulgaria - Iran, Islamic Republic of - Iraq - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The Queen (on the application of MS) (a child by his litigation friend MAS) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

whether MAS, who is lawfully present in the UK, is the brother of MS, an unaccompanied minor who has made an asylum application in France; whether the UK has a duty of investigation once it receives a take charge request and the scope of any such duty

19 July 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2013 Dublin III Regulation (EU) | Topic(s): Family reunification | Countries: Afghanistan - France - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

AAH (Iraqi Kurds – internal relocation) Iraq CG UKUT 00212 (IAC)

country guidance on availability of ‘internal flight’ in the IKR for individuals of Kurdish origin - supplementing Section C and replacing Section E of AA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] Imm AR 1440; [2017] EWCA Civ 944

26 June 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) | Countries: Iraq - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

HANY EL-SAYED EL-SEBAI YOUSSEF -and - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT and N2 - and - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

whether acts may be sufficient to satisfy the threshold for exclusion from the Convention under Article 1F(c), where those acts were neither themselves completed or attempted terrorist acts, nor can they be shown to have led to specific completed or attempted terrorist acts by others.

26 April 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations - Exclusion clauses | Countries: Egypt - Jordan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

MP v Secretary of State for the Home Department (C‑353/16) (reference for preliminary ruling)

interpretation of Articles 2(e) and 15(b) of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004

24 April 2018 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Complementary forms of protection - Mental health - Torture | Countries: Sri Lanka - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

AS (Safety of Kabul) Afghanistan CG [2018] UKUT 00118 (IAC)

“Whether the current situation in Kabul is such that the guidance given in AK (Afghanistan) [2012] UKUT 00163 (IAC) needs revision in the context of consideration of internal relocation.”

16 April 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) | Countries: Afghanistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

OPINION OF LORD TYRE In the petition O M (Petitioner) against SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Respondent) [2018] CSOH 17

The observation by the court in MIAB at paragraph 68 that many of the time-limits in the Dublin III Regulation are solely intended to regulate the position as between different member states is, at least as regards the six month time limit in article 29(1), inconsistent with the Court’s ruling that an applicant is entitled to rely upon expiry of the time limit in order to resist a transfer to the requested state. The same goes for the obiter observation of the Lord Ordinary in BM at paragraph 26 that the time limits in article 29(1) are solely intended to regulate the matter between member states. nothing in Shiri that casts any doubt on the correctness of the views expressed in both MIAB and BM regarding the suspensive effect of an administrative cancellation of removal directions falling within article 27(4).

12 March 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Session (Scotland) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2013 Dublin III Regulation (EU) | Topic(s): Suspensive effect | Countries: Sudan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Search Refworld