header-logo header-logo

06 May 2016
Issue: 7697 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of Nouazli) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 16, [2016] All ER (D) 133 (Apr)

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by an Afghan national who became permanently resident in the UK through his marriage to a French citizen, and who had unsuccessfully contended before the Court of Appeal that his detention pending removal after serving a prison sentence had been unlawful and contravened Art 27(1) of the Parliament and Council Directive (EC) 2004/58. The court held that his detention had not been unlawful. Detention under reg 24(1) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1003), did not discriminate without lawful justification against European Economic Area nationals and their family members, and the absence of a time limit had not rendered the appellant’s detention unlawful under European Union law.

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll