Customise Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorised as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyse the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customised advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyse the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Connect with us

Immigration exception to data protection found unlawful. Again

Immigration exception to data protection found unlawful. Again

Education

Immigration exception to data protection found unlawful. Again


The Court of Appeal has declared the government’s second attempt at an immigration exception for normal data protection law to be unlawful. The judgment in R (On the Application Of The 3Million) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 1474 upholds that of the High Court below, which we covered previously here: Amended data protection exemption for migrants declared unlawful. The case was brought by the 3million group amongst others and they have a write up on their website.

This is by-the-by, but I’ve been ruminating a lot recently on the absence of a proper discipline of or principles to immigration law. Paragraphs 45 to 50 of this judgment provide an illustration of how properly structured “immigration law” might work in practice. Specific provisions would be needed beyond general fall-backs on human rights or administrative law. Binding rules would be needed rather than policies. And a proper role for Parliament would be built-in as a safeguard. As the judges go on to say at paragraph 51, this does not mean flexibility should be eliminated. Immigration law requires flexibility. But it should be bounded by clearly defined law and scrutiny.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
You may also like...

More in Education

To Top