or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court refuses judicial review of the decision refusing to revoke the deportation order made in relation to a Nigerian national, on the grounds that the decision was not irrational or defective in any way.
Judicial review – asylum and immigration – Nigerian national challenging the decision refusing to revoke deportation order - five separate names for the applicant are given in the decision challenged, and a false name was used by him in previous proceedings before the Superior Courts – unable to determine exactly his date of birth - limited scope for challenge – alleged perversity - decision is not perverse – no basis for alleged disproportionality – allegation that his application did not receive fair consideration has not been demonstrated – alleged failure to consider his situation - misconception of the process - not obliged to consider everything from scratch but rather can ask himself or herself whether there is anything significantly new - lack of reasons – reasoning set out - alleged illusionary consideration - no evidence of a pre-ordained refusal to revoke - alleged failure to have regard to employment situation - alleged lack of legitimate basis - alleged lack of legitimate counter-balancing factors - an applicant cannot scratch his past immigration history from legal relevance simply by making a new application - alleged lack of proper balancing exercise - a decision not to revoke a deportation order is not a balancing exercise - alleged misconstruction of the law – decision is not irrational - no meritorious further or other grounds were advanced – discretion – 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.