Case summaries

  • My search
  • Keywords
    1
Reset
UK - Court of Appeal, 14 July 2003, B (R on the application of) v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Merton [2003] EWHC 1689
Country of applicant: Ivory Coast
This case sets out the requirements for a fair assessment of age when an undocumented individual‘s claim to be a child is disputed.
Date of decision: 14-07-2003
UK - Court of Appeal, 18 March 2003, Q and others, (R on the appplication of) v the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 364

This case considered of the support available for asylum seekers. It was held that the system in place was not procedurally fair and that Art 3 of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was engaged. Judicial review of the refusal was not an adequate remedy for refusal of support where the administrative procedure was unfair and inadequate.

Date of decision: 18-03-2003
UK - Immigration Appeal Tribunal, 19 February 2002, Tanveer Ahmed [2002] UKIAT 00439
Country of applicant: Pakistan
This decision established that the burden of demonstrating the reliability of documents adduced in an asylum case lay on the applicant.  Only when an allegation of forgery was made  and it was necessary to determine whether the documents were forged did the burden shift to the Home Office. In that case the standard was the balance of probabilities.
Date of decision: 19-02-2002
ECtHR - Ahmed v. Austria, Application No. 25964/94, 17 December 1996
Country of applicant: Somalia

This case involved a Somali refugee in Austria whose refugee status was ordered as forfeited after a criminal conviction. Because of the absolute nature of Art. 3, the Court found his criminal conviction immaterial and that he still faced a serious risk of persecution in Somalia, therefore Austria would breach its obligations under Art. 3 if his deportation was executed. 

Date of decision: 17-12-1996
ECtHR - Chahal v. The United Kingdom, Application No. 22414/93, 15 November 1996
Country of applicant: India, United Kingdom

This case involved the UK’s attempted deportation of an Indian citizen and leader of the Sikh separatist movement who lived in the UK and was allegedly a national security threat. Because of the risk of ill-treatment, the Court found the UK would breach Art. 3 if he were deported to India, in conjunction with a violation of Art. 13. Because he was not able to review the lawfulness of his prolonged detention, the Court also found a violation of Art. 5 (4). 

Date of decision: 15-11-1996
UK - Immigration Appeal Tribunal, 10 June 1994, Kaja (Political asylum; standard of proof) (Zaire) [1994] UKIAT 11038
Country of applicant: Congo (DRC)
The Immigration Appeal Tribunal (IAT) addressed the question of whether the assessment of facts and the determination of refugee status involved a two stage process with different standards of proof. The standard of proof for the assessment of status is “reasonable degree of likelihood.”
Date of decision: 10-06-1994