[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Amin, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWCA Civ 439 (31 March 2022) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/439.html Cite as: [2022] EWCA Civ 439 |
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT
MR RICHARD CLAYTON Q.C. SITTING AS A DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
CO/2338/2020
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
LADY JUSTICE CARR
and
LORD JUSTICE LEWIS
____________________
THE QUEEN (on the application of ALI TAWFIK MOHAMED AMIN) |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT |
Respondent |
____________________
Zane Malik Q.C. (instructed by the Government Legal Department) for the Respondent
Hearing date: 24 March 2022
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
This judgment was handed down remotely by circulation to the parties' representatives by email and release to Bailii. The date for hand-down is deemed to be on 31 March 2022.
Lord Justice Lewis:
INTRODUCTION
THE FACTS
The Application for Naturalisation
The Background Evidence
The Decision Refusing Naturalisation
"is not satisfied that you can meet the statutory requirement to be of good character due to your association with known members of Ansar Al Islam and your relationship with Mullah Krekar, who was the leader of the organisation from 2001 and 2003 and was well known for his extremist views when you chose to travel from Sweden to Norway to visit him and his family".
The Application for Reconsideration
The Supplemental Letter
The Judgment in the Court Below
"18. Mr Gajjar's careful submissions focus on a complaint that the defendant overlooked particular issues. However, it is plain from decision letters that the defendant had expressly considered factors that the claimant raised, such as the new relationship in the United Kingdom, the relationship with his wife and children, and the remote possibility of the claimant making contact with Mr Krekar or his family. However, the defendant concluded that those factors did not dissuade him from her conclusion that the claimant could not establish he was of good character. Mr Gajjar argues that the fact of the claimant's association does not have the significance which the defendant gives it. However, the defendant's principal concern appears to be the way in which the claimant addressed those associations rather than the mere fact of them. In any case, it is plain that the claimant had objectional associations in addition to the relationship he had with Mr Krekar and his family. I accordingly reject the claimant's irrationality challenge and now consider the challenge in terms of Mr Gajjar's complaint that the defendant's reasons were inadequate."
"In my judgment, the claimant's complaint about misapplication of the guidance must fail. I accept the defendant's submission and hold that the claimant has failed to demonstrate that the defendant acted in breach of policy by proceeding by way of mere association and/or that the old association was still relevant. In my judgment the defendant's reasoning on this issue was more complex and comprehensive and I reject Mr Gajjar's characterisation of the defendant's approach."
THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND SUBMISSIONS
(1) To find that the respondent had failed to have regard to, or given adequate reasons on certain material factors;(2) To find that the respondent had reached an irrational conclusion or misapplied the guidance on good character;
(3) To give adequate reasons for his decision.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Lady Justice Carr
Lord Justice Coulson