- BY Colin Yeo
Yet another case on the immigration rules on deportation
THANKS FOR READING
Older content is locked
A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement, become a member of Free Movement to get unlimited access to all articles, and much, much more
TAKE FREE MOVEMENT FURTHER
By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features;
- Single login for personal use
- FREE downloads of Free Movement ebooks
- Access to all Free Movement blog content
- Access to all our online training materials
- Access to our busy forums
- Downloadable CPD certificates
Official headnote to AB (para 399(a)) [2015] UKUT 657 (IAC) (20 November 2015):
Head note 3 of the Upper Tribunal’s decision in Ogundimu (Article 8 – new rules) Nigeria [2013] UKUT 60 (IAC) applies to the version of para 399(a) of the Immigration Rules that was in force as at 27 July 2014. It does not apply to the current version of para 399(a) of the Immigration Rules which came into force on 28 July 2014. This is because the current version does not have the requirement that “there is no other family member who is able to care for the child in the UK” which concerned the Upper Tribunal in Ogundimu.
To translate for you, Upper Tribunal Judge Gill seems to take the remarkable view that the current version of the UK immigration rules on deportation are not in conflict with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009.
She also takes sides in the debate in the Upper Tribunal on the meaning of “unduly harsh”. She prefers the version least helpful to claimants.
SHARE
