Ali v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 372 (17 April 2024)

Ali v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 372 (17 April 2024)

Article 8 ECHR is engaged where a settled migrant with an established private life in the UK is refused re-entry after a temporary absence, and the refusal must be assessed for proportionality. Abbas does not preclude engagement of Article 8 in such circumstances; it applies only to those seeking to develop a private life. The FTT erred in law by misinterpreting Abbas and failing to consider proportionality.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Civ 372
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Saleh Ahmed Handule Ali; Defendant/respondent: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber); Interested Party/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Proceed With Judicial Review
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Article 8 ECHR – Private Life, Entry Clearance, Returning Residents, Judicial Review, Error of Law, Proportionality, Cart Jurisdiction
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Article 8 ECHR – Private Life Entry Clearance Returning Residents Judicial Review Error of Law +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saleh Ahmed Handule Ali

Claimant/appellant

Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)

Defendant/respondent

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Interested Party/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Proceed With Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 8 ECHR (private life) is engaged when a settled migrant is refused re-entry to the UK after losing a travel document abroad
  2. 2 Whether the First-tier Tribunal misinterpreted Abbas v SSHD regarding Article 8 engagement
  3. 3 Whether refusal of entry clearance in these circumstances is a disproportionate interference with private life

Ratio Decidendi

Article 8 ECHR is engaged where a settled migrant with an established private life in the UK is refused re-entry after a temporary absence, and the refusal must be assessed for proportionality. Abbas does not preclude engagement of Article 8 in such circumstances; it applies only to those seeking to develop a private life. The FTT erred in law by misinterpreting Abbas and failing to consider proportionality.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Permission to proceed with the claim for judicial review granted
  • Claim for judicial review allowed