It also paid out £624,000 in adverse legal costs and £103,000 in compensation payments after UKBA removals were successfully challenged by two families.Ī further £405,000 adverse legal cost and £122,000 compensation over two years were paid out in relation to unlawful detention cases. One lost immigration appeals tribunal case alone cost the Home Office £1 million once the fees for its appeal had been taken into account. It was also expecting to pay out £37.5 million in a dispute between UKBA and five former accommodation providers for asylum support contracts.Ī further £21.2 million was earmarked for outstanding cases in which UKBA changes to immigration rules had a negative impact on institutions. The department admitted it faced a £8.9 million liability for cases of unlawful detention against the UK Border Agency (UKBA). The Home Office's own accounting report for 2012/13 suggests the department is shelling out millions of pounds on legal battles, although the data available is disorganised and incomplete. Mr Hiri was represented by Raza Halim of Garden Court Chambers and Toufique Hossain of Duncan Lewis acted as his solicitor.Phoenix Group publishes its Net Zero Transition Plan with its full c£0.3 trillion investment portfolio in scope to decarbonise We are grateful to the British Armed Forces and to Veteran’s Aid for all their support for our client.” The Home Secretary should have seen sense long ago instead of fighting this case. It is a shame this had to go all the way to the High Court. Our argument was simply that a man who gave his life to fight for this country, and in every other way but for one speeding offence, showed good character, should not be deprived of British Citizenship. “Those who will read this judgment will see that the Judge applied fairness and common sense to this case. ![]() Toufique Hossain, Public and Immigration Law Director at Duncan Lewis and solicitor in the case says: There has to be a comprehensive assessment of each applicant’s character, as an individual, which involves an exercise of judgment, not just ticking boxes on a form.” Mrs Justice Lang DBE has set out that in these cases “The Defendant is entitled to adopt a policy on the way in which criminal convictions will normally be considered by her caseworkers, but it should not be applied mechanistically and inflexibly. The holistic approach advocated by Mr Hiri has been upheld by the High Court today. However, Mr Hiri had repeatedly made clear to the Secretary of State that he took full responsibility for the offence and accepted that it must be taken into account he simply asked to have that conviction weighed in the balance against all of the evidence he had provided, in order to assess his character as a whole. The Home Office frequently insisted in this case, in line with her policy, that it could not “overlook” or “disregard” Mr Hiri’s offence. In this case, the High Court has held that Home Office official “deliberately excluded from his consideration the circumstances of the offence and the mitigating factors”. ![]() Mrs Justice Lang DBE warned against the Secretary of State applying her policy on the determination of ‘good character’ in a “mechanistic and inflexible” way and set out that the Secretary of State “must consider all aspects of the applicant’s character” where “the statutory test is not whether applicants have previous criminal convictions – it is much wider in scope than that.” Today the High Court held that the Secretary of State’s “decision-making process was legally flawed” and has set out that she should “re-consider her decision in accordance with the law”. Mr Poloko Hiri, a national of Botswana, had been described by senior military figures as an “intelligent, motivated and hard-working soldier” with an “exemplary record of conduct”, who “had his character put to the test (…) where his peers have had to depend on him in austere and challenging environments.” Despite that evidence, the Secretary of State repeatedly asserted that Mr Hiri was not of “good character”, insisting on the narrow basis of his speeding offence. The High Court today ruled in favour of a distinguished former member of the British Armed Forces who had been refused British Citizenship by the Home Office on the basis of a sole speeding offence for which he received 5 points and a £100 fine. Legal 500 recommended Immigration Solicitors Duncan Lewis today won the case of Poloko Hiri, a Botswanian "Sapper" in the British Army who was refused British citizenship due to a "minor speeding offence"- Poloko Hiri v SSHD EWHC 254 (Admin).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |