GROUND 4: THE ARTICLE 8 ECHR ISSUE.
69. All representatives were in agreement with our analysis that this ground is inextricably immersed within the first ground, as [14] – [44] above demonstrate. Accordingly, in common with the first ground, this ground too must fail.
- Introduction
- Abdul Aziz
- Statutory Framework
- The Secretary of State’s Decisions
- content
- The Secretary of State’s Decisions Analysed
- Permission to Appeal
- GROUND 1: THE SECTION 55 ISSUE
- Khan
- Mr Khan,
- Mr Rauf,
- Mr Aziz,
- The FtT’s Approach
- context
- legal
- only
- naturalisation
- JO and Others (Section 55 Duty) Nigeria
- MK (Section 55 – Tribunal Options) Sierra Leone
- Kaur (Section 55/Public Interest Interface)
- JO Nigeria
- twofold
- MK Sierra Leone
- possibility
- Kaur
- SS (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- in the circumstances of this case
- in this decision-making context
- right
- duty
- Deliallisi
- Delliallisi
- nature
- GROUND 2: THE EU LAW ISSUE
- G1 v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Pham
- AB (Nigeria v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- their fathers
- future
- R (G1)
- GROUND 3: THE POLICY ISSUE
- Paragraph 2.5:
- Paragraph 2.6:
- Paragraph 2.7:
- Paragraphs 2.20 – 2.21:
- might
- serious
- serious organized crime
- policy
- R (Alconbury Developments) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions
- What is crucial is that the policy must not fetter the exercise of the discretion.
- R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Ozminnos
- In Re McFarland
- GROUND 4: THE ARTICLE 8 ECHR ISSUE.
- GROUND 5: THE PART 5A NIAA 2002 ISSUE
- A Footnote
- OMNIBUS CONCLUSION
- Dated