All your resources at your fingertips.Learn More
(Queen's Bench Division (Administrative); John Howell QC sitting as a deputy judge of the HC; 20 November 2008)
The Secretary of State's policy, DP 5/96, containing a presumption that no enforcement action would be taken against children who had been resident in the UK continuously for 7 or more year ('relevant children', was applicable to all relevant children, whether or not they had been living with a parent who had no lawful entitlement to remain in the UK. While the foundation of DP 5/96 was the private life that a child who had lived here for that period would have established in the jurisdiction, whether or not the child had any leave to be here, the Secretary of State's approach to children who had established roots in the jurisdiction by their residence did not appear to be the result of any coherent overall approach. In taking into consideration that a child was not living with a parent who required leave to remain, the Secretary of State had discriminated against the child in this case.
"the principal (monthly) periodical dealing with contemporary issues" Sir Mark Potter P