*/
Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Pakistani national arrived in the United Kingdom as a spouse of a person settled and present in the UK. The defendant Home Secretary made two consecutive decisions permitting him to remain on a limited basis. The claimant overstayed his permission by two years and eight months. He made a further application for leave to remain, which the Secretary of State refused. The claimant applied for judicial review of that decision. Dismissing the claim, the Administrative Court held that it was settled law that considerations under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights were embedded in the Immigration Rules such that if the Secretary of State applied those Rules then, ordinarily, art 8 considerations would have been fully catered for. In the instant case, no good arguable grounds had been advanced that there had been factors particular to the claimant that had not been capable of being assessed from within the existing framework of Rules and which therefore needed to be assessed outside of the Rules. Further, the Secretary of State had taken into account all of the factors and matters which had been relevant to the claimant. Finally, there had been no error of law in the approach adopted by the Secretary of State to the question of whether there had been insurmountable obstacles to relocation.
Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Pakistani national arrived in the United Kingdom as a spouse of a person settled and present in the UK. The defendant Home Secretary made two consecutive decisions permitting him to remain on a limited basis. The claimant overstayed his permission by two years and eight months. He made a further application for leave to remain, which the Secretary of State refused. The claimant applied for judicial review of that decision. Dismissing the claim, the Administrative Court held that it was settled law that considerations under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights were embedded in the Immigration Rules such that if the Secretary of State applied those Rules then, ordinarily, art 8 considerations would have been fully catered for. In the instant case, no good arguable grounds had been advanced that there had been factors particular to the claimant that had not been capable of being assessed from within the existing framework of Rules and which therefore needed to be assessed outside of the Rules. Further, the Secretary of State had taken into account all of the factors and matters which had been relevant to the claimant. Finally, there had been no error of law in the approach adopted by the Secretary of State to the question of whether there had been insurmountable obstacles to relocation.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Unlocking your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step. By Philip N Bristow
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, discusses the upcoming changes to pensions and Inheritance Tax and the potential impact on your financial future
Save the Children UK is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC
The Chief Legal Officer to the Metropolitan Police, barrister Brett Welch, tells Anthony Inglese CB about his mission and the work to turn the Met around
Barrister apprenticeships – shortly to provide the fourth pathway to the Bar – are an ideal opportunity to support local talent and ‘grow your own’, say Tim Coulson and Dr Jane Dennehy
Grok around and find out – or not? Mariya Peykova investigates the nudification scandal, what the law has to say about sexually explicit deepfakes, and whether stronger regulation is needed
Oliver Lewis spotlights an overlooked yet rapidly evolving area of law – coercive and controlling behaviour within care contexts