Court of Appeal
Published March 31, 2009
MS (Palestinian Territories) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

A challenge to the lawfulness of future removal directions did not come within the appeal regime under the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

The Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Rix, Lord Justice Scott Baker and Lord Justice Jacob) so stated on January 23, 2009, when dismissing the appeal of MS, a Palestinian, against a ruling of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal on January 23, 2008, that a decision to issue removal directions against him would be lawful.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department had refused his claims for asylum and breach of Convention rights on May 24, 2007, and had issued a notice of immigration including removal directions specifying a proposed country of return. MS contended that any removal directions subsequently made for that specified destination would be unlawful.

LORD JUSTICE RIX said that section 82(1) of the 2002 Act provided a right of appeal only in the case of an immigration decision and in section 82(2) removal directions were not included in the exclusive definition of “immigration decision”.

Removal directions, therefore, were not an immigration decision subject to appeal and it would be in principle anomalous to allow future removal directions which had not even yet been made to be challenged as part of the statutory appeal scheme under the 2002 Act.

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure