||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 386 (Nov)
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Brooke, Buxton and Sedley LJJ
||Ramby de Mello and Sabinder Juss (instructed by the Coventry Law Centre) for the appellant.
||Lisa Giovannetti (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State.
||29 November 2005
Immigration - Deportation - Expiration of leave to remain in United Kingdom - Human rights - Effect of previous decision of Court of Appeal resolving same issues - Whether Immigration Appeal Tribunal applying correct test to question of proportionality - , Sch 1, Pt 1, art 8.
Having declined to find a distinction between the opinions of Lord Bingham and Baroness Hale in the case of R (on the application of Razgar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department , and applying the case of ZT v Secretary of State for the Home Department , the Court of Appeal held that the Immigration Appeal Tribunal had not erred in law in holding that the adjudicator, in allowing the appellant's appeal against the decision of the Secretary of State to return her to Uganda, had not applied a sufficiently demanding test to determine whether the appellant's rights under art8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary