MA, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs & Anor
[2024] EWHC 332 (Admin)
LND1 & Ors, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor
21 March 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 278
Court of Appeal
An Afghan judge applied to move to the UK under a special program. The government rejected his application. A court ruled the government hadn't properly considered his application and sent it back to be reviewed properly.
Key Facts
- •LND1, a former Afghan judge, applied for relocation to the UK under the Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (ARAP).
- •The Ministry of Defence (MoD) rejected his application, finding he didn't meet the eligibility criteria.
- •LND1 challenged the MoD's decision via judicial review.
- •The High Court quashed the MoD's decision, finding it irrational.
- •The Court of Appeal considered the appeal by the Secretaries of State for Home Department and Defence.
Legal Principles
Interpretation of Immigration Rules should be sensible, according to the natural and ordinary meaning of words, recognising they are statements of administrative policy.
Mahad v Entry Clearance Officer [2009] UKSC 16, [2010] 1 WLR 38
Conditions 1 and 2 of ARAP 3.6 are separate and must both be satisfied. Condition 1 concerns the relationship between the applicant's work and a UK government department; Condition 2 concerns the contribution of that work to UK objectives.
This case
Common law principles of procedural fairness require adequate reasons for decisions, especially those involving assessment of individual circumstances against non-mechanical criteria. Pro-forma reasons are usually insufficient.
This case
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part.
The High Court incorrectly conflated Conditions 1 and 2 of ARAP 3.6. While the MoD's decision was flawed for failing to consider certain aspects of LND1's work, the Court of Appeal did not find that LND1 automatically met the criteria. The case was remitted to the MoD for reconsideration.
The MoD's decision of 9 December 2022 was quashed and remitted for reconsideration.
The MoD failed to consider LND1's work on drafting penal and anti-narcotics laws and his role at the Kabul court for internal and external security (2008-2012).
Similar Cases
LND1 & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor
[2023] EWHC 1795 (Admin)
MP1, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Defence
[2024] EWHC 410 (Admin)
JZ v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors.
[2023] EWCA Civ 178
FMA & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWHC 1579 (Admin)