Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
LORD JUSTICE BROOKE Vice-President, Court of Appeal (Civil Division) LORD JUSTICE MOORE-BICK and LORD JUSTICE WILSON ____________________
(Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of Smith Bernal WordWave Limited 190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG Tel No: 020 7421 4040 Fax No: 020 7831 8838 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Ramby de Mello and Adrian Berry (instructed by the Immigration Advisory Service) for the Appellant Philip Coppel (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Respondent ____________________
Part 2. Is there power to grant a stay of removal directions on an out of time application for permission to appeal?
In Pharis v SSHD [2004] EWCA 654 at [13] I explained that CPR 52.7 reflected the statutory bar on removal pending appeal that was now contained in s 78 of the 2002 Act, so that no power to grant a stay can be forthcoming from that quarter in the present context. And since the IAT/AIT possesses no power to grant a stay of removal directions, because that matter is entirely dealt with by the automatic stay provisions in s 78, CPR 52.10(1) confers on the Court of Appeal no power which the IAT/AIT did not possess.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.