All your resources at your fingertips.Learn More
It was not unreasonable for the Secretary of State to only make a decision regarding leave to remain, without making a further removal decision pursuant to section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. The Claimant's solicitors had unreasonably pursued the claim, and were therefore ordered to pay the Defendant's costs.
8 March 2011
(1) The Claimant, a citizen of Pakistan, argued that at the time the Defendant refused him leave to remain in the UK, there was a further obligation requiring the issuance of a decision pursuant to section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 for the removal of both he and his sons, this being a decision that could have been appealed.
To read the full case summary and to view the case transcript, you must subscribe to Jordans Public Law Online (if you already subscribe click here to log in).
To request a free trial click here and select Jordans Public Law online from the drop down menu.
An authoritative source of case reports covering every aspect of immigration, asylum and...