![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> W, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 254 (Admin) (15 February 2019) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2019/254.html Cite as: [2019] EWHC 254 (Admin) |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable PDF version]
[Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
R (on the application of W) |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
Secretary of State for the Home Department |
Defendant |
____________________
Amanda
Weston QC and Leonie Hirst (instructed by Public Law Project) for the Claimant
Robin Tam QC and Julie Anderson (instructed by Government Legal Department) for the Defendant
Hearing date: 28 January 2019
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Mr Justice Dingemans:
Introduction
Procedural matters
Relevant background
The first decision dated 28 April 2016
The second decision dated 28 February 2018
The issues arising from the grounds of challenge and summary grounds of defence
The restricted leave policy
The Refugee convention, the Qualifying Directive and their interpretation
Relevant statutory provisions
The Immigration Rules
A failure to consider the further evidence about intellectual functioning and no adequate alternative remedy – grounds 1 to 3
No need to address the claim for unlawful discrimination – ground 4
No claim for false imprisonment – ground 5
No order for disclosure
Conclusion