All Articles: medical treatment

More Article 3 appeals rejected as Court of Appeal stands firm on Paposhvili

In MM (Malawi) [2018] EWCA Civ 2482 the Court of Appeal has again confirmed that there is indeed a discrepancy between the domestic law on Article 3 medical cases as set out in the House of Lords case of N v Secretary of State for the Home Department ...

30th November 2018 By

Court of Appeal gives authoritative guidance on Article 3 medical cases

The Court of Appeal last week issued “authoritative guidance” on Article 3 medical challenges against removal, reflecting the European Court of Human Rights’s decision in Paposhvili v Belgium. Lord Justice Sales, giving the court ...

5th February 2018 By

Expert reports in human rights cases must be up to scratch

In HK, HH, SK and FK v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 1871 the Court of Appeal found that asylum seekers could be returned to Bulgaria under the Dublin III Regulation. Removal would not violate the appellants’ Article ...

1st December 2017 By

Tribunal rejects softer Strasbourg approach to Article 3 medical cases

When is it a breach of Article 3 to remove someone with a severe, possibly terminal, medical condition to a country where they will not receive the care they need? When they’re days away from death? When it will halve their lifespan? What level ...

20th November 2017 By

Strasbourg revisits approach to serious illness, medical treatment and Article 3

On 13 December 2016, the Grand Chamber handed down its much-awaited decision in Paposhvili v Belgium (Applcn No. 41738/10). The decision: (1) clarifies, widens and provides guidance on the circumstances in which an alien suffering from a serious illne ...

27th December 2016 By

Kidney transplant patient loses human rights immigration case

Hareef, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 873 (Admin) is a case that was heard in the wake of GS (India), & Ors v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 40, which concluded that in asylum claims, Article 3 can have n ...

29th April 2016 By

No broadening of Article 3 test in health cases

Unfortunately the Court of Appeal’s judgment in the Article 3 health test cases in GS (India) & Ors v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 40 (30 January 2015) does not change very much for migrants with serious health ...

4th February 2015 By

Human rights, expulsion and medical treatment cases: a review

Human rights medical treatment expulsion cases are perhaps some of the most stark, most difficult and most challenging cases faced by a human rights lawyer. They concern life itself and will often involve a miserable, painful death if unsuccessful. T ...

27th November 2013 By

Medical treatment human rights cases and Rose Akhalu

The case of Rose Akhalu (health claim: ECHR Article 8) [2013] UKUT 400 (IAC) offers a glimmer of hope to some migrants dependent on health care in the UK facing removal. These cases can involve people being sent to their country of origin to die an av ...

11th September 2013 By

GS (India) and medical treatment cases

Some time ago, I put up an angry post (it is never a good idea to publish in anger) about the case of  GS (Article 3 – health exceptionality) India [2011] UKUT 35 (IAC), in which it was held that a diabetic man on dialysis who would be painfully ...

17th May 2012 By