- Government can be liable for costs in Cart type judicial review cases
- No costs awarded for successful unlawful detention claim
- Court of Appeal guidance on costs in ETS cases
- Failure to carry out proper medical assessment makes detention unlawful
- New guidance on costs awards against the Home Office could transform immigration appeals
Court of Session clarifies time limits for judicial review challenges in Scotland
In Odubajo v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] CSOH 2, the Court of Session has ruled that the three-month time limit for raising judicial review proceedings starts on the date of the decision, even though the person affected may not h ...
14th January 2020Vulnerable adults in the immigration tribunal
In SB (vulnerable adult: credibility) Ghana [2019] UKUT 398 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal has provided a steer on how immigration judges should approach evidence given by vulnerable adults, in addition to that provided in the Joint Presidential Guidance No ...
9th January 2020Schrödinger’s appeal
Can an appeal be both finally determined and pending at the same time? This conundrum, akin to Erwin Schrödinger’s famous thought experiment involving a cat in a box with a lethal substance, was tackled by the Upper Tribunal in Niaz (NIAA 2002 s. 1 ...
7th January 2020Duty to court means citing authorities against you, immigration lawyers told
The Upper Tribunal clearly has a tough time getting into the holiday spirit. Ejiogu (Cart cases) [2019] UKUT 395 (IAC), reported just before Christmas, is the equivalent of a judicial smack on the hand. It is another reminder of the importance of wha ...
6th January 2020No absolute confidentiality for asylum information in family cases
The impact of disclosing information from family proceedings in immigration matters has been in the news of late but the reverse situation rarely arises. One such is the recent case of R v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Disclosure of Asyl ...
30th December 2019Avoiding the naughty step in Cart judicial review cases
On a warm summer’s day in late July, five sets of appellant lawyers found themselves in Court 4 of the Upper Tribunal in Field House, huddled together on what could only be characterised as “the naughty step”. Unaware at the start of t ...
9th December 2019