Upper Tribunal confirms the legitimacy of the new immigration rules – but questions their completeness – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted November 8th, 2012 in deportation, human rights, immigration, news, tribunals by sally

“Before the new immigration rules were introduced in July, cases involving Article 8 ECHR ordinarily required a two-stage assessment: (1) first to assess whether the decision appealed against was in accordance with the immigration rules; (2) second to assess whether the decision was contrary to the appellant’s Article 8 rights. In immigration decisions, there was no doubt that human rights were rooted in primary legislation: s.84(1)(c) and (g) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, the ‘2002 Act’) allows an appeal to be brought against a decision which unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42) (public authority not to act contrary to Human Rights Convention) as being incompatible with the appellant’s Convention rights. In addition to this, there is s.33(2) of the UK Borders Act 2007 which provides, as one of the statutory exceptions to the automatic deportation regime, ‘…where removal of the foreign criminal in pursuance of a deportation order would breach (a) a person’s Convention rights’.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 8th November 2012

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com