or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court: (1) refuses judicial review of deportation order, on the grounds that: if a marriage is determined to be one of convenience in an unchallenged statutory process which has afforded fair procedures, no consideration of family rights arises or is required; the deportation of unsettled migrants breaches human rights law only in exceptional circumstances; any given immigration decision can be relied on for the purposes of a later immigration decision; and the court would exercise its discretion to refuse relief in light of his wrongful conduct, lack of candour and abuse of the process; and (2) refuses leave to appeal.
Asylum and immigration – judicial review – challenge to deportation order - marriage of convenience – immigration history – husband presence in the state was at all times unlawful – marriage – residence card refused – review application refused - first set of judicial review proceedings - proceedings were compromised - fresh decision - proposal to deport him - deportation order made - unchallenged statutory decision that the marriage is one of convenience - no constitutional rights arise for consideration – verbose pleading - if the marriage is determined to be one of convenience in an unchallenged statutory process which has afforded fair procedures, no consideration of Article 8 rights arises or is required - deportation of unsettled migrants breaches Article 8 only in exceptional circumstances - any given immigration decision can be relied on for the purposes of a later immigration decision - proceedings were filed out of time - dismissed the proceedings on the grounds of discretion based on wrongful conduct, lack of candour and abuse of the process – decisions taken pursuant to the lawful operation of immigration control will be proportional in all save a minority of exceptional cases - judicial review refused – refuses leave to appeal – no point of law of exceptional public importance -
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.