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.
MS S HARRISON (instructed by Messrs Winstanley-Burgess) appeared on behalf of the Appellant. MR R JAY (Treasury Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Respondent ____________________
The applicants in this case for judicial review are husband and wife. They challenge a decision by the Secretary of State to adhere to an earlier decision not to allow the first applicant to remain in this country and to deport him to India. Leave was given in this case by McCulloch J after an oral hearing.
Mr Jay, for the Secretary of State, points out that the reference to a "life-threatening medical problem" has to be read in the context of Dr Kaikini's earlier report, in which he says:"At present Mrs Sandhu's condition is being regularly monitored at the Hammersmith Hospital and her cardiac medications have been increased in an effort to try to control her angina on medication.At Mrs Sandhu's last hospital visit it was felt that should her angina not respond satisfactorily to medication a repeat coronary and graft angiography would be undertaken."
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.