Key Facts
- •Khadija Akhtar, a 62-year-old Pakistani national, lived in the UK since 1985 and was granted ILR in 2000.
- •She and her husband were convicted in 2016 of mortgage fraud and received sentences totaling 4 years and 3 months and 11 years respectively.
- •The Secretary of State ordered her deportation to Pakistan.
- •Akhtar has five adult British citizen children, one of whom, Altaf, has significant needs.
- •The Upper Tribunal (UT) dismissed Akhtar's appeal, finding that while she had a strong private and family life in the UK, it did not outweigh the public interest in deportation.
Legal Principles
Deportation of foreign criminals is in the public interest; more serious offenses warrant greater public interest in deportation.
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (2002 Act), section 117C(1)-(2)
For serious offenders (sentenced to at least four years), deportation is required unless there are 'very compelling circumstances over and above' those in Exceptions 1 and 2 of section 117C.
2002 Act, section 117C(6)
Exceptions 1 and 2 relate to long-term lawful residence, social/cultural integration, and unduly harsh effects on family. The 'very compelling circumstances' test allows consideration of factors beyond these exceptions.
2002 Act, section 117C(4), (5); NA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 662; HA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSC 22; Yalcin v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWCA Civ 74
The 'very compelling circumstances' test requires a full proportionality assessment, weighing all relevant circumstances against the strong public interest in deportation. It will be a high threshold.
HA (Iraq), paragraphs 46-71
Tribunals are not required to explicitly address each Exception when considering 'very compelling circumstances'. The focus should be on a complete proportionality assessment, identifying significant factors and their relative importance.
Yalcin, paragraphs 49-67
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The UT correctly applied the law, considering all relevant factors in a full proportionality assessment. While not explicitly listing every factor considered under Exceptions 1 and 2 when assessing 'very compelling circumstances', the UT's decision, read as a whole, demonstrates that these factors were implicitly considered. The UT found Akhtar's private and family life in the UK, while strong, did not outweigh the compelling public interest in deportation.