Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Practical aspects to assessing competence in children
Rebecca Stevens, Partner, Royds Withy KingThis is an article regarding the practical aspects to assessing competence in children. The article explores a range of practicalities, such as meeting a...
Scrumping the crop of recent pension decisions
Rhys Taylor, 36 Family and 30 Park PlaceJonathan Galbraith, Mathieson Consulting2020 has thus far proved to be a memorable year for all the wrong reasons, but nonetheless it remains an interesting one...
Conduct in financial remedies – when is it now a relevant consideration?
Rachel Gillman, 1 GC/Family LawThis article provides an overview of all aspects of financial misconduct following the recent decision of Mostyn J in OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52, wherein all aspects of...
The treatment of RSUs/Stock Options in light of XW v XH
Peter Mitchell QC, 29 Bedford RowStock Options and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are frequently encountered by the Family Court when dividing property on divorce or dissolution of a Civil Partnership....
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
View all articles
Authors

IMMIGRATION: AC (Turkey) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009]

Sep 29, 2018, 17:09 PM
Slug : ac-turkey-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-2009
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 25, 2009, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 87133

(Court of Appeal; Laws, Smith and Hooper LJJ; 25 March 2009)

The Turkish mother was sentenced to 8 years for grievous bodily harm with intent, and was recommended for deportation. The child was initially placed in foster care, but subsequently the father was granted a residence order, then, while the mother was in prison, the mother obtained a contact order. The mother appealed the deportation order, and an adjudicator agreed that deportation would constitute a disproportionate interference with family life of the mother and daughter. After her release from prison the mother obtained increased contact with the child, including staying contact, and, ultimately, obtained a shared residence order. When the tribunal considered the Secretary of State's appeal, it concluded that the mother's deportation would be disproportionate, and a violation of rights under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Secretary of State appealed, arguing that the tribunal had failed to give sufficient weight to her policy of deporting non-British nationals convicted of serious crimes.

Dismissing the Secretary of State's appeal, the court observed that, given the many references in the judgment to the relevant authorities, it was impossible to suppose that the tribunal had not been well aware of the Secretary of State's policy on deporting serious criminals, even though it had not expressly given that policy a stated weight.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from