Giri, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE JAY
Areas of Law
- Immigration Law
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a judicial review where the claimant challenged the decisions by the Secretary of State to deny his application for leave to remain and to refuse future entry clearance based on allegations of using deception and failing to disclose material facts. The claimant's history of entry clearance applications included falsified documents in 2006, a fact which was admitted during a subsequent interview but overlooked in granting entry clearance later the same year. Various subsequent leave to remain applications were approved until 2011. Upon review, the court found the claimant's 2011 answer regarding past deception to be dishonestly false. The court dismissed the application for judicial review while suggesting the Secretary of State reconsider the refusal decision given the claimant's immigration history.
J U D G M E N T
MR JUSTICE JAY:
This is an application by way of judicial review pursuant to which the claimant seeks to challenge a decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department given on 13 July 2011, first of all to refuse his application to vary his leave to remain on the basis that he failed to disclose a material fact pursuant to paragraph 332(1A) of the Immigration Rules; and, secondly, to refuse future applications for entry clearance in accordance with paragraph 320(7B) on the basis that he had used deception on his application to vary his leave to remain. That decision was reconsidered by the Secretary of State and maintained in a further decision of 10 October 2011. Following a hearing before Mr Philip Mott QC sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge on 16 February 2012, permission to apply for judicial review was granted on a single ground, namely that the Secretary of State's decision was not properly in accordance with paragraph 322(1A) and was thereby unlawful.
The essential factual background to this case is as follows. The claimant is a citizen of the Kingdom of Nepal and was born there on 12 February 1982. On 23 February 2006 he made an application for entry clearance as a student. It seems that he submitted a bank balance certificate and statement of account in support of that application, as he would have needed to do to satisfy the Entry Clearance Officer of the means requirement in the Rules.
On the same day the Entry Clearance officer in Kathmandu sent an urgent request by fax to the relevant bank seeking its assistance, namely whether it could verify the balance certificate and statement of account, which had purportedly emanated from that bank. The document verification report which came from the bank is no longer available. The Secretary of State has explained through a witness statement that the relevant evidence simply does not exist. However, it is clear from the Entry Clearance Officer's refusal decision dated 28 February 2006 that there was, at one stage at least, a document verification report in existence since it is referred to expressly at page 79 of the bundle as part of the refusal of entry clearance decision. The Entry Clearance Officer stated that he was satisfied to a high degree of probability that not all of the documents submitted were genuine, and the application was therefore refused pursuant to paragraph 320(21) of the Immigration Rules.
Undaunted, on 16 August 2006 the claimant made another applic