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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll