PK (Ukraine)  EWCA Civ 1756 overturned the Upper Tribunal decision in PK (draft evader; punishment; minimum severity)  UKUT 241 (IAC) and looked at military service in Ukraine. Sir Rupert Jackson, with whom Patten J and Asplin J agreed, said that "the question whether a draft evader facing a non-custodial punishment for failing to serve in an army which regularly commits acts contrary to IHL is entitled to refugee status, is one of overarching importance" and allowed the appeal, remitting it to the Upper Tribunal. Julian was led by Anthony Metzer QC of Goldsmith Chambers.
TS (Ukraine) (unreported) - a claim relating to military service in Ukraine. The Appellant was successful on the basis that he faced detention in conditions which would contravene Article 3 ECHR.
NK (Ukraine) (unreported) - this appeal related to Article 8 family life of a mother with two children born in the UK, and whether it would be reasonable for the children to leave the UK with their mother. The appeal was allowed.
BO (Nigeria) (unreported) - successfully argued that the First Tier Tribunal Judge had misapplied the burden of proof in considering whether there had been a genuine and effective transfer of residence to Ireland for the purposes of Regulation 9 of the EEA Regulations 2016.
Khusainov (unreported) - dealt with the acquisition of ten years lawful residence during the currency of s.3C leave. The appeal was remitted to the FTT where it was allowed.
Onyschuk (unreported) - successfully argued that a British spouse would face 'insurmountable obstacles' to moving to his wife's country of origin, and that his wife should therefore be entitled to remain in the UK under Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules.
SM (Kenya) (unreported) - successfully argued that the First Tier Tribunal Judge had erred in law by giving undue weight to the Appellant's "mannish appearance" and her ability to present herself in a more feminine way on return, in a case relating to her sexual orientation and history of trafficking.
Sagynkyk (unreported) - successfully defended a First Tier decision to allow an appeal on Article 8 grounds, where the initial refusal was on 276B 'ten year rule' grounds where there had been excess absences.
ZB (Uzbekistan) (unreported) - an Upper Tribunal judge is entitled to reconstitute herself as a First Tier Tribunal Judge in order to treat a Rule 24 response as an application for permission to cross-appeal.
Mollayeva (unreported) - successfully defended a First Tier decision to allow an appeal where there was an allegation of deception in a TOEIC test.
HVT & ET (unreported) - where the grant of permission does not engage materially with the application made, it should be determined on the basis that the grant of permission is formulated in clearly qualified terms and to allow the appellant to pursue the appeal on any other ground would be procedurally unfair. The SSHD's appeal was therefore dismissed.
Elsakhawy (immigration officers; PACE) Egypt  UKUT 86 (IAC) - immigration officers conducting a 'pastoral' home visit are acting in an administrative enquiry and not a criminal one, and are therefore not bound to abide by the provisions of PACE.
OB (Ukraine) (unreported) - the First Tier Tribunal Judge was entitled to find on the evidence that the Ukrainian military was committing breaches of international humanitarian law with which the Appellant may be associated on mobilisation, and therefore to allow his appeal under the Refugee Convention.
Nemsadze (unreported) - if an appeal is brought late, s.3C leave may still cover the period once the appeal is pending, as this is distinct from the mere 'possibility' of an appeal out of time.
Boswell (unreported) - the Armed Forces Covenant supports that service in the armed forces can be taken into account to weigh on the Appellant's side in a public interest assessment under Article 8.
BH v SSHD (unreported) - successfully argued that the SSHD had not considered the evidence fairly in the case of a gay man from Turkmenistan
SSHD v Tuan Ha - where a parent has a subsisting relationship with a qualifying child, s.117B(6) protects that relationship. Click here for Bailii report.
Budathoki v SSHD - in assessing dependency of an elderly parent under the EEA Regulations, "it is not necessary that the person be wholly or even mainly dependent if a person requires material support for essential needs in part that is sufficient." The appeal was remitted and was ultimately successful. Click here for Bailii report.
Liberman v SSHD - successfully argued that the First Tier Tribunal had applied the wrong standard of proof in an alleged sham marriage case under the EEA Regulations. Click here for Bailii report.
SSHD v PF - successfully defended a decision allowing an appeal on Article 8 grounds where the appellant was HIV positive. Click here for Bailii report.
Jiminez v SSHD - successfully challenged a First Tier finding of a sham marriage under the EEA regulations. The appeal was remitted and ultimately successful. Click here for Bailii report.
R (Korobtsova) v SSHD - See case report via Bailii by clicking here
PO (Nigeria) (unreported) This was an appeal against deportation on Article 8 grounds which had been dismissed. Julian appeared for the Appellant, securing permission in the Court of Appeal to appeal further. In granting permission Ward LJ described Julian as a “persistent advocate.”
NMC v H - secured a striking off order against a nurse who had been convicted of four counts of child neglect. See here for press report.
R (Mazaza) v SSHD This was a judicial review of the Secretary of State’s decision not to treat the Claimant’s application for asylum as a ‘fresh claim’ under paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules. The application had been made sur place as it related to the activities of the Claimant in the UK which postdated her previous claim for asylum. The claim was successful and paved the way for other members of the same group to make good their claims