Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tribunal allowed the asylum appeal, finding the appellant’s family had repeatedly located her in Nigeria, so internal relocation was not a safe or reasonable option.
The Upper Tribunal dismissed a Gurkha-family Article 8 appeal, holding the appellants had not shown a sufficient causal link between historic injustice and their own circumstances.
The District Judge was entitled to find the applicant a fugitive based on his failure to comply with conditional release obligations and concealment of his whereabouts. The interference with family life, even considering new circumstances, did not reach the threshold of exceptionally severe consequences required to outweigh the public interest in extradition. No arguable error in law or principle was demonstrated.
Source excerpt
AL v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWCA Civ 370 (31 March 2026)
The Court of Appeal dismissed AL’s immigration appeal, holding that new Article 3 and Article 8 arguments were not properly raised below and no error of law was shown.
Bucur v Fifth District Court of Bucharest, Romania [2026] EWHC 482 (Admin) (04 March 2026)
The High Court refused a renewed application for permission to appeal in an extradition case, holding that Article 8 did not make surrender disproportionate.
Extradition appeal dismissed. The High Court upheld a finding that the appellant was a fugitive and held extradition to Poland was not disproportionate under Article 8.
High Court extradition appeal dismissed. The court rejected abuse of process and article 8 arguments, holding that the delay and family impact did not outweigh extradition.
Herceg v Budapest Environs Regional Court (Hungary) [2026] EWHC 145 (Admin) (28 January 2026)
The High Court refused an adjournment, fresh evidence, and permission to appeal in an extradition case, holding that Articles 3 and 8 did not bar surrender to Hungary.
The appeal was dismissed because the impact of extradition on the appellant's family, while significant, did not reach the threshold of exceptional severity required to outweigh the strong public interest in extradition. The fresh evidence did not materially alter the balance or demonstrate oppression under section 14.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed an extradition appeal to Poland, holding that removal would not disproportionately interfere with Article 8 family life rights.
Explore more
