In the news this month, at date of writing, it is still unclear as to who the next Prime Minister will be, the current candidates being Jeremy Hunt and Boris Johnson. The overwhelming favourite and current frontrunner remains Boris Johnson. The most notable result of this is that, currently, the UK is set to exit the European Union on 31 October 2019. It is unclear as to whether a new ‘deal’ can be agreed prior to then, and it is less clear as to whether the EU would grant the UK another Article 50 extension if such an extension were sought. Given that the EU position is that there will be no renegotiation of the deal offered, the likelihood of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit has increased. This remains the case despite Parliament’s objections to such a Brexit.
The focus this month has been predominantly on asylum and nationality law. The court’s answer to whether a Country Policy and Information Note can offset a Country Guidance case in SS v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWHC 1402 (Admin), and whether or not Dublin III compels unaccompanied minors to make their asylum cases in the first safe country is answered in KA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 914. Issues of fact finding, specifically where to start when one has a failed asylum claim, are explored in AL (Albania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 950, and whether or not it is ever appropriate to detain someone throughout their asylum claim is dealt with in KA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 914. Finally, an updated approach to returning failed asylum seekers to Kabul is investigated in AS (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 873. Clarity is given in R (oao Hassan & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWHC 1288 (Admin) regarding how to handle cases of statelessness/right of abode when an applicant claims to be a British Overseas Citizen, and the credibility of witness statements and certificates in proving British Citizenship forms the basis of R (oao Abdul Kadir) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWHC 1332 (Admin). The importance of detailed and specific reasoning in finding the removal of a foreign offender to be ‘extra unduly harsh’ is highlighted in Secretary of State for the Home Department v JG (Jamaica)  EWCA Civ 982, and in SP (Albania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 951 the court looks at the appropriateness of certifying an asylum claim on the grounds of human trafficking, and how the definition of trafficking is to be construed.
The Immigration Law Briefing is part of the Bloomsbury Law Online Service. The full briefing is available here.