Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The secretary of state for the Home Department, more commonly known as the home secretary, is a senior minister of the Crown in the Government of the United Kingdom and the head of the Home Office. [3] The position is a Great Office of State, making the home
The Home Secretary rejected his claim for asylum and on appeal, this refusal was affirmed by the Adjudicator and the IAT. There was a period of over 5 months between the IAT hearing of 22 October 2002 and the issuing of a decision on 4 April 2003.
R (on the application of Farrakhan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (legal citation [2002] EWCA Civ 606) was a challenge by way of judicial review to the ban on Louis Farrakhan entering the United Kingdom.
The House of Lords allowed the appeal. Lord Steyn gave the leading judgment. Lord Hoffmann agreed with Lord Steyn and said the following. [note 1]Parliamentary sovereignty means that Parliament can, if it chooses, legislate contrary to fundamental principles of human rights.
A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56 (also known as the Belmarsh 9 case) is a UK human rights case heard before the House of Lords.It held that the indefinite detention of foreign prisoners in Belmarsh without trial under section 23 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
This category contains those who have held the position Secretary of State for the Home Department in the government of the United Kingdom. Subcategories This category has the following 4 subcategories, out of 4 total.
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1989] 1 QB 26 was an English administrative law decision that first recognised the prerogative power to do whatever "was necessary to meet either an actual or an apprehended threat to the peace".
R. (Adam, Limbuela and Tesema) v Secretary of State for the Home Department was a case decided on 3 November 2005 by the UK House of Lords that determined whether or not a delay in initiating an application to seek asylum limited an individual from receiving access to state relief. [1]