Shah, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE LEWIS
Areas of Law
- Immigration Law
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The claimant, a tier four student in the UK, challenged three decisions: refusal of further leave to remain, removal due to alleged deception, and detention. The defendant found the claimant's test scores to be fraudulent, leading to these decisions. The court held that the removal decision, which invalidated previous leave to remain, only allowed for an out-of-country appeal. The court also held that the detention was lawful and denied judicial review on all counts.
J U D G M E N T
1. MR JUSTICE LEWIS: This is a renewed application for permission to apply for judicial review. It is important to identify what are said to be the decisions under challenge, and given the way that the Secretary of State has expressed herself I have some sympathy with the way in which the claimant decided to bring judicial review.
2. The first decision that is said to be challenged is the decision refusing the claimant further leave to remain in the United Kingdom. The claimant was a tier four student. He had leave to be in the United Kingdom. He applied in law to vary that leave and to obtain further leave to remain. That is the subject of one decision.
3. The second decision is the decision to remove him from the United Kingdom pursuant to section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 on the grounds that he used deception in seeking, whether successfully or not, leave to remain. Section 10(8) also says this:
"When a person is notified that a decision has been made to remove him in accordance with this section the notification invalidates any leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom previously given to him."
4. The third area of challenge in effect is to the decision to detain the claimant from a time in about May 2014 until his release on bail in about June 2014.
5. The background is that the claimant was a student, as I say, with a visa allowing him to be in the United Kingdom until 28 February 2014. On 20 February he applied for further leave to remain; that is whilst he still had leave he asked for the leave to be varied so it continued to a later time. As part of his application he had to submit evidence of proficiency in the English language. In fact he submitted test scores from tests conducted by an organisation called the Educational Testing Services.
6. Following investigations the defendant concluded that a large number of those tests, including those allegedly taken by the claimant, were fraudulent. The defendant concluded that the tests had been taken not by those who said that they had taken the tests but by proxies taking the tests on their behalf. That position did not become fully clear until the Defendant filed her acknowledgement of service and other correspondence.
7. As a result the claim form does not expressly deal with this question of the test and whether or not Mr Shah took it himself or whether he used a proxy. However, the fact that he continued his claim indicates that he takes the view