US (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1086 (23 July 2015)
The applicant's circumstances, including medical needs and private life, do not present an arguable point of law or sufficient evidence to outweigh the public interest in removal; the appeal is essentially a factual challenge and has no prospect of success.
- Citation
- [2015] EWCA Civ 1086
- Parties
- Applicant/appellant: US (Pakistan); Respondent/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 July 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Immigration Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Article 8 ECHR, Medical Treatment and Removal, Proportionality, Access to Healthcare
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
US (Pakistan)
Applicant/appellant
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Respondent/respondent
Procedural Posture
Immigration Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether removal to Pakistan would disproportionately interfere with applicant's Article 8 rights due to medical treatment needs
- 2 Whether the Upper Tribunal erred in its assessment of evidence regarding availability and affordability of medical treatment in Pakistan
- 3 Whether the correct legal test for appeal was applied
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant's circumstances, including medical needs and private life, do not present an arguable point of law or sufficient evidence to outweigh the public interest in removal; the appeal is essentially a factual challenge and has no prospect of success.
Court Disposition
Permission to appeal refused
Orders
- Permission to appeal to Court of Appeal is refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment