R (Shah) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] EWHC 2206 (Admin) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Date | 2013 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
10 cases
-
Anna L v Circuit Court in Katowice Poland
...that Carnwath LJ was wrong in this regard.' 113 I accept also the analysis of that decision by Mitting J in R (Shah) v SSHD [2013] EWHC 2206 (Admin), at paragraph 36: 'the case of Rashid… has given rise to innumerable applications to the Administrative Court and much case law. It has been a......
-
Moussaoui v Secretary of State for the Home Department
... ... The claimant has not sought to argue that any representation in the correspondence that a decision had been made amounted to a legitimate expectation and I cannot see that there has been any failure or omission to perform a duty. Further applying the judgement of Mitting J in R (Shah) v SSHD [2013] EWHC 2206 at paragraph 36, cited with approval by King J at paragraph 113 of his judgement in Geraldo : "there is no principle of administrative law that if the Secretary of State had made a decision earlier resulting in a more favourable outcome for an ... ...
-
R Lakaj v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...principle in public law. 30 For authority, one can look at the decision in the Immigration field, of R (on the application of Shah) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2206 (Admin). At paragraph 36, Mitting J notes that the Secretary of State is entitled to apply the po......
-
R Miranda Ortiz v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...by this court, does not have to be examined. 39 There are general statements in the case of Geraldo, reference already given, and the case of Shah [2013] EWHC 2206 (Admin), suggesting that there is no right to have a case decided under earlier policy known to law. I accept that, but in my j......
Request a trial to view additional results