or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court refuses judicial review of decisions refusing Pakistani national permission to remain and ordering his deportation, in circumstances where the points advanced: were not pleaded; were not made to the decision-maker; have already been rejected by the Courts; and were legalistic and tenuously linked to the facts of the case.
Judicial review – asylum and immigration – Pakistani national challenging the decisions refusing him permission to remain and ordering his deportation – entered the UK on general student visa - formed a relationship there with a married woman – overstayed illegally – had a child – threatened by his partner’s husband and decided to come to this state – refused international protection – sought permission to remain – application refused – judicial review issued - alleged lack of proper or adequate determination - alleged inadequate regard to material submitted - alleged unfairness of procedure – erred in making adverse inferences in relation to his move from Direct Provision Accommodation to the private rental sector without providing him with any opportunity to address or respond to this concern - alleged erroneous reliance on precarious nature of his immigration status - judicial review is not a mechanism for awarding marks out of a hundred to legal essays written by the Minister - alleged failure to consider his private life - Alleged error of law – points not pleaded – points already decided - points advanced to the court that were never made to the decision-maker - legalistic points which only arise tenuously if at all, on the facts and where the applicant has failed to put before the court highly material information and explanations – question mark over documents submitted – judicial review refused.
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.