IG, R (On the Application Of) v The Special Immigration Appeals Commission

IG, R (On the Application Of) v The Special Immigration Appeals Commission

The grounds of challenge advanced by the Special Advocates are not reasonably arguable. SIAC did not err in law in concluding that the Secretary of State's submission on the relevance of the Disputed Information was not an abuse of process, nor in finding the information irrelevant. The circumstances had changed since the earlier proceedings, and SIAC's pragmatic approach was justified.

Parties
Claimant: IG; Defendant: Special Immigration Appeals Commission; Interested Party: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Interested Party: AR
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for permission to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Disclosure of Information, Judicial Review, Relevance of Evidence
Administrative Law Immigration Law Abuse of Process Disclosure of Information Judicial Review Relevance of Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IG

Claimant

Special Immigration Appeals Commission

Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Interested Party

AR

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SIAC erred in law in concluding that the Secretary of State's relevance argument was not an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether SIAC erred in finding that the Disputed Information was not relevant

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds of challenge advanced by the Special Advocates are not reasonably arguable. SIAC did not err in law in concluding that the Secretary of State's submission on the relevance of the Disputed Information was not an abuse of process, nor in finding the information irrelevant. The circumstances had changed since the earlier proceedings, and SIAC's pragmatic approach was justified.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Permission to apply for judicial review is refused