Yolanda Ward v Secretary of state for the home department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 December 1996 |
| Date | 19 December 1996 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Court of Appeal
Simon Brown, Peter Gibson, Hobhouse LJJ
R de Mello for the applicant
Miss L Giovannetti for the respondent
Cases referred to in the judgment:
Ladd v MarshallWLRUNK [1954] 1 WLR 1489: [1954] 3 All ER 745.
Ademola Onibiyo v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1996] Imm AR 370.
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Senathirajah Ravichandran (No.2) [1996] Imm AR 418.
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Yolanda Ward (unreported, QBD, 31 October 1996).
Asylum whether a fresh claim has been made the acid test, as refined, to be applied by the Secretary of State whether in the instant case the conclusion by the Secretary of State that there was no fresh claim was unreasonable. Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993 s.8.
Renewed application for leave to move for judicial review following refusal by Ognall J. The applicant was a citizen of Peru. Her application for asylum was refused by the Secretary of State. She appealed but withdrew her appeal before the hearing and made an application for leave to remain on the basis of a marriage contracted after the refusal of asylum by the Secretary of State. Her application on the basis of marriage was refused. An application was then again made for asylum. Further details of the basis of the claim were put to the Secretary of State. He concluded that they added nothing material to the earlier claim and declined to treat the application as a fresh claim giving a right, on refusal, to an appeal to a special adjudicator.
Cousel argued that the decision of the Secretary of State had been Wednesbury unreasonable. The court summarised the test to be applied by the Secretary of State in determining whether a fresh claim has been made.
Held:
1. The acid test to be applied by the Secretary of State to determine whether a fresh claim had been made was laid down in Onibiyo and refined in one particular in Ravichandran (No.2).
2. It was for the Secretary of State to decide if a fresh claim had been made and his decision could only be challenged on Wednesbury principles.
3. Applying those principles there was nothing unreasonable in the Secretary of State's decision.
Simon Brown LJ: The applicant is a 23 year old citizen of Peru. By this renewed application she seeks leave to move for judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision by letter of 29 July 1996 refusing her renewed claim for asylum and, no less important to the present challenge, refusing to accept that it constituted a fresh claim such that on the ruling authorities its refusal attracts a right of appeal to the special adjudicator under section 8 of the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993.
Before turning to the facts of the case it is convenient, first, to summarise very shortly the principles applicable to the present case as established by this court in Onibiyo v Secretary of State for Home Department [1996] Imm AR 370 and, as in one particular, refined by Dyson J a little later in R v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Ravichandran (No.2) [1996] Imm AR 418.
The touchstone of what constitutes a fresh claim is to be found in this passage in the judgment of Sir Thomas Bingham MR in Onibiyo at page 381:
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Secretary of State for The Home Department, ex parte Coulibuly
...the Home Department ex parte Boybeyi (unreported, QBD, 24 January 1997). R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Ward [1997] Imm AR 236. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Kabala [1997] Imm AR 517. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte ......
- R v Special Adjudicator, ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Cakabay
-
Mahmut Cakabay v The Secretary of State for The Home Department (Cakabay No2)
...substantial change in his circumstances since that date, his application will be refused." 14 R v Secretary of State , ex parte Ward [1997] Imm AR 236, R v Secretary of State, ex parte Kabala [1997] Imm AR 517 and R v Secretary of State, ex parte Jaoa Watuzola 17 December 1997, 15 Per Lord ......
-
R v Secretary of state for the home department ex parte Mahmut Cakabay (Cakabay No 2)
...Home Department ex parte Coskun Boybeyi (unreported, QBD, 24 January 1997).* Yolanda Ward v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1997] Imm AR 236. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Hamid Habibi [1997] Imm AR 391. R v Immigration Appellate Authority ex parte Secr......