CONCLUSION
109.In light of the above analysis, I find that the PTW guidance will not inevitably operate unlawfully in a legally significant number of cases on the grounds advanced by ground 4. The omission of an express reference to the Secretary of State’s residual discretion to consider applications for permission to work from the dependents of asylum seekers or those who have made fresh claims is not unlawful for the purposes of Article 8 read with Article 14 ECHR.110.This claim is dismissed.~~~~0~~~~
- J U D G M E N T
- Permission to work and volunteering for asylum seekers, version 10.0
- Judge Stephen Smith:
- FACTUAL BACKGROUND
- PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
- LEGAL FRAMEWORK
- asylum seekers, failed asylum seekers, and those who have submitted protection based further submissions
- from those who have lodged an asylum claim or further submission which remains outstanding
- SUBMISSIONS
- DISCUSSION
- in order to strike it down as unlawful it was held that it was necessary to show that it would be incapable of being operated in a proportionate way and so was inherently unjustified in all or nearly all cases.
- if it were followed it would inevitably result in some decisions which were unlawful
- CONCLUSION