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.
Amanda Weston (instructed by Birnberg Peirce and Partners) for the Claimant Carine Patry (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 3 July 2014 ____________________
i) The decision is not in accordance with section 55 of the Borders Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 ["section 55"] (which reflects article 3 of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child) ["UNCRC"] because the defendant has not paid proper regard to the best interests/welfare of FI.
ii) The policy applied by the defendant is unclear on how the best interests of a child applicant for registration should be treated and is thus unlawful.
iii) The defendant misapplied her policy to the claimant and, on the material before her, her conclusion was flawed.
There is no statutory lexicon of factors which the Secretary of State must take into account when considering such applications. It is common ground, however, that she is bound to apply section 55 which provides:
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.