CA-2024-001157 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1452

Conclusion

For those reasons, I would dismiss the appeal on all grounds.

Lord Justice Nugee

I agree.

Lady Justice Andrews

I also agree. For all the reasons given by my Lady, particularly in paragraphs 93-96 above, the UT was right to hold that the provisions of Para 117C apply whenever a “foreign criminal” who has been deported to another country, such as this appellant, makes the application from abroad for revocation of the deportation order which is a necessary precondition to their obtaining entry clearance to return to the UK.

I would add a short postscript. I have observed from reading the parties’ written submissions in a number of recent applications for permission to appeal that the important decision of this Court in NA (Pakistan), referred to by my Lady in paragraph [17] above, does not appear to be as familiar as it should be to lawyers who practise in this area.

Despite the fact that this authority on the construction of s.117C(3) is now almost 10 years old, and the fact that it has been subjected to consideration by the Supreme Court at least twice without adverse comment, I am still seeing submissions to the effect that in a case of a medium offender, who does not meet Exceptions 1 and 2, section 117C(6) does not apply and the tribunal or the court should look instead at the Rules. It is a matter of great concern to me that those submissions have not been confined to counsel acting on behalf of individual appellants; I have recently seen them being advanced on behalf of the Secretary of State. I hope that paragraph 94 of my Lady’s judgment and this short concurring judgment will help to heighten awareness of an important decision which appears, for whatever reason, to have dropped under the radar.