Challenge to “deport first, appeal later” process rejected
28 June 2022
No Comments
The Upper Tribunal has rejected a challenge to the Article 8 compliance of the “deport first, appeal later” system despite previously having ordered the Home
The Upper Tribunal has rejected a challenge to the Article 8 compliance of the “deport first, appeal later” system despite previously having ordered the Home
In the recent High Court case of R (Arman & Anor) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1217 (Admin), Mr Justice Mostyn made comments about remote hearings
Juba (s. 94B: access to lawyers) [2021] UKUT 95 (IAC) is the latest judgment dealing with the “deport first appeal later” policy, following on from
In Mendes v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 924 the Court of Appeal considered the process for removing an EU
The High Court has held that the Home Office trying to apply its “deport first, appeal later” policy to EU citizens is incompatible with European
The new case of R (QR (Pakistan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1413 is yet another example of fallout from
In the case of R (Wandzel) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1) [2018] EWHC 1371 (Admin), Nigel Poole QC, sitting as a
When the Supreme Court delivered judgment in R (Kiarie and Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42, immigration practitioners across the
The judgment in OO (Nigeria), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 338 is one of
In the judicial review case of Ayache, R (on the application of) v SSHD (paragraph 353 and s94B relationship) [2017] UKUT 122 (IAC) the Upper
In 2014 the Home Office amended the UK’s rules on EU law deportation cases to allow a deportation to go ahead before an EEA national
The Court of Appeal has given judgment in the test case on the meaning and effect of the “deport first, appeal later” provisions of the
This week, Lord Justices Elias, Richards and McCombe sat in the Court of Appeal and heard the first test cases against Section 94B of the
The Upper Tribunal has rejected a challenge to the Article 8 compliance of the “deport first, appeal later” system despite previously having ordered the Home Office to bring the claimant back to the UK to ensure he had an effective appeal. The case is R (Watson) (s. 94B process; s....
In the recent High Court case of R (Arman & Anor) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1217 (Admin), Mr Justice Mostyn made comments about remote hearings that may be a straw in the wind suggesting that it will be harder to argue the unfairness of out-of-country appeals in future. Background: arguments...
Juba (s. 94B: access to lawyers) [2021] UKUT 95 (IAC) is the latest judgment dealing with the “deport first appeal later” policy, following on from the famous Kiarie and Byndloss case. In Juba, the Upper Tribunal has found that it was acceptable for the First-Tier Tribunal to hear an appeal...
In Mendes v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 924 the Court of Appeal considered the process for removing an EU citizen from the UK whilst they have a pending appeal against deportation. The legal issue is largely the same as in the recent case of...
The High Court has held that the Home Office trying to apply its “deport first, appeal later” policy to EU citizens is incompatible with European Union law. The case is Hafeez v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2020] EWHC 437 (Admin). Background: the deport first, appeal...
The new case of R (QR (Pakistan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1413 is yet another example of fallout from last year’s Supreme Court judgment in Kiarie and Byndloss, relating to the infamous “deport first, appeal later” policy. The QR judgment itself doesn’t give...
When the Supreme Court delivered judgment in R (Kiarie and Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42, immigration practitioners across the UK took an audible sigh of relief. In that case, the Supreme Court held that the “deport first, appeal later” regime which operated under...
The judgment in OO (Nigeria), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 338 is one of a series of cases challenging the lawfulness of the certification regime under s.94B Nationality Immigration Asylum Act 2002 (as amended). The issue has been considered...
In the judicial review case of Ayache, R (on the application of) v SSHD (paragraph 353 and s94B relationship) [2017] UKUT 122 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal considers the lawfulness of a decision to certify a human rights claim under s.94B Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. For those not already...
In 2014 the Home Office amended the UK’s rules on EU law deportation cases to allow a deportation to go ahead before an EEA national completes any appeal process against that decision to deport. This has become known as “deport first, appeal later”. Similar rules were also introduced for non...
The Court of Appeal has given judgment in the test case on the meaning and effect of the “deport first, appeal later” provisions of the Immigration Act 2014. The case is R (On the Application Of Kiarie) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1020...
This week, Lord Justices Elias, Richards and McCombe sat in the Court of Appeal and heard the first test cases against Section 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Section 94B, introduced by the Immigration Act 2014 and which came into force on 28th July 2014, provides the...
