STATUTES
| Published date | 01 November 1969 |
| Date | 01 November 1969 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1969.tb01243.x |
STATUTES
IMMIGRATION APPEALS
ACT
1969
RECENT
case law has removed any illusions which may have existed
since
Re
H.
K.
(An
Infant)
that
it
was possible, by means of the
prerogative orders,
to
build an implied code of fair administrative
procedure in the jungle of immigration control. Although Lord
Parker said in that case that
an
immigration officer has a duty
to
act
''
fairly,'' this duty has been narrowly interpreted
in
regard
to
Commonwealth immigrants,2 and in regard
to
aliens the Court of
-4ppeal has confimed that
it
need not be observed at alL3 This re-
affirmation
of
Soblen
in relation
to
"
rightless
"
aliens, alongside a narrow and vague form
of
natural justice appli-
cable in the case of some Commonwealth citizens, emphasises that
one
of
the major obstacles
to
the establishment of
a
single code
of
fair procedure for these
two
classes of immigrants lies in the sub-
stantive differences of status between them.
Nevertheless, Parliament, in giving effect to most
of
the recom-
mendations of the Wilson CommitteeY6 has attempted to create such
a code, enforceable outside the ordinary courts through a new
system of appellate authorities. Adjudicators (appointed by the
Home Secretary) and an Immigration Appeal Tribunal (appointed
by the Lord Chancellor) will hear appeals, in terms
of
the Immigra-
tion Appeals Act,, from those Commonwealth citizens who are
subject to immigration control, and, in terms of corresponding
provisions established by Order-in-Council,' from aliens.
It
is pro-
posed to appoint some twenty full-time and thirty part-time adjudi-
cators to deal with the anticipated annual total of
15,000
to
20,000
appeals. The adjudicators
will
in most instances be non-lawyers,*
and
Venicofl
1
[1967]
2
Q.B.
617, 628-630.
2
R.
v.
Secretary
of
State
for
Home Affairs, ex p. Harnaik Singh
[1969]
1
W.L.R.
835
(no
need
to
go
into maitbrs not advanced by applioant for
admission);
R.
v.
Secretary
of
State
for
the Home Department, ex
p.
Aktar
Singh,
July
25,
1967
(unreported) (Commonwedth citizen with no right
of
entry
not entitled
to
be heard);
R.
v.
Home Secretay, ez pi, Dhillon, The
Times,
December
21,
1968
(onus
on
,a
plicant
to
satisfy immigrahion
officer);
cf.
R.
v.
Chief Immigration Okcer Lgmpne Airport, ex p. Amrik
Sing+
[1969]
1
Q.B.
333.
3
Schmrdt
v.
Secretary
of
State
for
Home Affairs
[1969]
2
W.L.R.
337;
[1969]
1
All
E;R.
904.
Note
in particular the reliance placed
on
the absence of
a
'I
right
:
[1969]
1
All
E.R.
at
W4B-G
and
SlOE-9111.
This
is
3
doubtful
distinotion:
cf.
Barwick C.J. in
Banks
v.
Transport Regulation
Board
[196S]
Australian Argus
L.R.
445
(H.C.
of
A.).
4
[1963]
5
Q.B.
243.
5
[1920] 3
K.B.
72.
6
Report
of the Committee
on
Immigration Appeals, Cmnd.
3387
(1967)
noted by
the present writer in
(1968) 31
M.L.R.
310.
7
8.
14.
The Draft Aliens (Appeals) Order is contained in Cmnd.
3833.
S
H.C.Deb.,
Vol.
776,
cols.
555-556.
Cf.
the Wilsq? Committee,
papa
15h-156,
which believed thad legal qualifications would be
668
an
advantage.
To continue reading
Request your trial