Nyakonya, R (on the application of) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal & Anor [2002] EWHC 1544 (Admin) (18 July 2002)

Nyakonya, R (on the application of) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal & Anor [2002] EWHC 1544 (Admin) (18 July 2002)

The Adjudicator had jurisdiction to consider the claimant's human rights claims under section 65 of the 1999 Act, regardless of whether the Secretary of State had previously determined them. The claimant failed to establish a real risk of persecution or breach of human rights on return to DRC, and the Secretary of State lawfully certified the application under section 73(8) as made solely to delay removal.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 1544 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Yamoyembe Nyakonya; 1st Defendant: Immigration Appeal Tribunal; 2nd Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Permission to Apply for Judicial Review and Renewed Application
Outcome
Application for permission to apply for judicial review refused; all applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Asylum, Article 3 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Immigration Appeals, One Stop Procedure, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Certification Under Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Asylum Article 3 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Immigration Appeals One Stop Procedure +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yamoyembe Nyakonya

Claimant

Immigration Appeal Tribunal

1st Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Permission to Apply for Judicial Review and Renewed Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Adjudicator had jurisdiction to consider human rights claims not previously determined by the Secretary of State
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faced a real risk of persecution or breach of human rights on return to DRC
  3. 3 Whether the Secretary of State's certification under section 73(8) was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Adjudicator had jurisdiction to consider the claimant's human rights claims under section 65 of the 1999 Act, regardless of whether the Secretary of State had previously determined them. The claimant failed to establish a real risk of persecution or breach of human rights on return to DRC, and the Secretary of State lawfully certified the application under section 73(8) as made solely to delay removal.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to apply for judicial review refused; all applications dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Renewed application for permission refused.