header-logo header-logo

11 November 2010
Issue: 7441 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of Aitouaret) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] All ER (D) 06 (Nov)

On its true construction, s 36(1) of the UK Borders Act 2007 referred to persons who had served such periods of imprisonment as they were required to serve pursuant to a custodial sentence.

There could be no duality of detention: either the foreign national prisoner had served a term of imprisonment and was detained under s 36 of the Act, or he had not served a term of imprisonment and was still a serving prisoner.

The two could not overlap. Section 36 of the Act was concerned with the ability to keep a foreign national prisoner who had been sentenced to imprisonment for 12 months or longer in detention in circumstances where he might otherwise be released. Prior to that time, he had been a serving prisoner, so there was no need to exercise any power to detain under s 36.

The concern arose in circumstances where a foreign national prisoner was going to be released but the secretary of state had not decided whether or not to

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