SA (Pakistan) & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department

For reasons which I will explain in a moment, we have concluded that we do not possess the jurisdiction to entertain this point on these appeals and we propose therefore to dismiss the appeals, but it is necessary to explain how that conclusion is arrived at.

I should also cite, for it is relevant to an argument about the court’s jurisdiction which we must consider, section 84(1)(e) of the 2002 Act. It stipulates that one of the available grounds of appeal to the AIT against an immigration decision is “that the decision is otherwise not in accordance with the law”.

“…given the consequences for the individual of separating the two stages, it is both unjust and irrational not to deal with them in immediate sequence.”

Sedley LJ cited a judgment of mine in a case where this court was faced with a closely analogous problem, JM (Liberia) [2006] EWCA Civ 1402. I hope it will be helpful if I venture just to read a short passage from that judgment.

It seems to me to be wrong in principle that the price of getting before an independent tribunal, for a judicial decision on a human rights claim should be the commission of a criminal offence and other associated legal prohibitions.”