Appeal Number: IA/13542/2009
This is the Appellant’s appeal against the decision of DesignatedImmigration Judge McClure made following a hearing at Manchester on 3
November 2009. The Designated Immigration Judge allowed theRespondent’s appeal against the decision of the Appellant made on 29
June 2009 to give directions for his removal from the UK.
The Respondent is a citizen of Iraq born on 1
January 1978. He arrived inthe UK on 31
January 2001 concealed in the back of a lorry aftertravelling through Turkey and claimed asylum on the same day. His claimwas refused on 18
July 2001 and a subsequent appeal dismissed on 12
The Respondent was detained on immigration matters on 17
October2008. On 22
October 2008 the Appellant decided to issue removaldirections against him, and on 9
March 2009 permission was granted tothe Respondent to pursue an application for judicial review against thatdecision. The removal directions were cancelled but the Respondentremained in custody on immigration grounds until granted bail on 17
April 2009. A further decision to remove was made on 24
June 2009 the Respondent’s appeal came before Immigration Judge White. He recorded that both advocates accepted that the decisionof 24
April 2009 was not in accordance with the law because the decisionof 22
October 2008 was still extant and the judicial review proceedingswere unresolved. Immigration Judge White allowed the Appellant’s appealto the extent that the matter be remitted to the Respondent to make alawful decision.
The judicial review proceedings were compromised in a consent orderdated 4
The final decision and the subject of the appeal before DesignatedImmigration Judge McClure was made in a Notice of Decision dated of 29
June 2009. The Respondent had been required to leave the UK by 28
November 2002 and had no basis of stay here. It was the Appellant’s casethat the Respondent’s criminal behaviour justified his removal to Iraq.7.The Respondent appealed on the grounds that the decision to remove himwas unlawful as a breach of his rights under Article 8 of the ECHR.
The Appellant’s Criminal History
The Respondent has committed a number of criminal offences during histime in the UK. On 4
September 2002 he was cautioned for criminaldamage.
December 2003 he was convicted and sentenced to twoconcurrent terms of four months’ imprisonment for criminal offencesincluding driving a motor vehicle whilst disqualified, driving without