header-logo header-logo

11 August 2011
Issue: 7478 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of BB) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission [2011] EWHC 2129 (Admin), [2011] All ER (D) 28 (Aug)

Decisions regarding the entry, stay, and deportation of aliens did not concern civil rights and obligations within the meaning of Art 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. That applied to immigration measures which did not, or did not yet, result in proceedings but might result in immigration detention. Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) bail proceedings only took place in the direct context of deportation proceedings or immigration measures. They were an alternative to or relaxation of immigration detention and were directly in aid of contemplated deportation, conditioned on the person’s future attendance before an immigration officer. SIAC bail proceedings might affect a person’s civil and human rights, but did not determine them in the sense that the relevant issue at stake was the question of deportation. The bail proceedings were properly to be characterised as interim proceedings in the deportation proceedings or proceedings ancillary to the deportation proceedings. Article 6(1) of the Convention did not apply to them.

Bail proceedings did not determine the civil

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll