Z, Re Judicial Review

[1] This is a reclaiming motion from a decision of the Lord Ordinary dismissing the appellant's petition for Judicial Review of a decision of the Secretary of State refusing to treat the petitioner's submissions of 4 October 2011 as a fresh claim.

[4] The respondent recognised that she had to exercise her functions in a way that took account of the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in the UK, meaning that the best interests of such children were a primary consideration in the evaluation of the proportionality of a decision to remove the family from the UK.

"It is noted that you have not provided any information which pertains specifically to the best interests of your three children. A new Immigration Judge would conclude that although health care and education in the Congo may not be of the same standard as in the United Kingdom, the children's best interests will be to remain with their parents and raised in their own culture. Furthermore, if you return together there is no reason to believe that relocation to Congo would have a particularly detrimental effect on your children.

In conclusion, even taking into account the length of your residence in the United Kingdom, the ties that your family have built up whilst you have been here, through friendship and education, it is clear that the balance is struck in favour of your family's removal"

[6] She then went on to consider other factors such as the need to maintain effective immigration control, the reclaimer's immigration history and the fact that any family or private life was established when residence in the UK was precarious. In all, she considered that there was no realistic prospect of a new Immigration Judge finding that removal of the family would breach article 8 rights.