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
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Lockdown 2: how does it affect child contact?
No sooner had clarity been obtained as to how child contact would work within and across the tier system, than the government announced its suspension in England.  From 5 November 2020, a 4-week...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
New Cafcass guidance on working with children during COVID-19
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published guidance on working with children during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The guidance sets out arrangements for...
View all articles
Authors

IMMIGRATION: SB (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] EWCA Civ 28

Sep 29, 2018, 16:30 PM
Slug : sb-bangladesh-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-2007-ewca-civ-28
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 31, 2007, 07:38 AM
Article ID : 85237

(Court of Appeal; Ward, Neuberger and Gage LJJ; 31 January 2007)

The mother of two children with the right to remain in the UK, aged 22 and 16, sought indefinite leave to remain. The mother had initially entered under a visa obtained with false information; the mother was the second wife of the children's father, who had moved to the UK with his first wife many years before. The mother's six children had all moved to the UK over the years, living with the father until reaching adulthood. The father had now died, and his widow was unwilling for the two remaining stepchildren to stay with her. The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal rejected the mother's claim that her removal would be a disproportionate interference with her Art 8 rights, commenting that a properly structured application for leave to enter the UK by the mother, after she had returned to Bangladesh, ought to be accepted by an entry clearance officer.

When deciding whether the removal of the mother to Bangladesh would be disproportionate, that is whether her case was truly exceptional, the Tribunal should not have carried out or taken into account their own assessment of her prospects of coming back into the UK on an indefinite basis pursuant to an application for entry clearance made in Bangladesh. The case would be remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration.

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