Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Minister’s approach in refusing Canadian citizen a right to remain was in accordance with law
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court dismisses appeal against the decision of the Minister for Justice refusing to allow a Canadian to remain after her visa expired, on the grounds that the approach of the Minister was lawful in that her rights pursuant to the European Convention on Human Rights were engaged, but it is only in exceptional circumstances that interference with family rights will displace a state’s entitlement to operate an immigration policy.
Supreme Court – Canadian who arrived with visa to join husband who was here to study dentistry – working holiday authorisation scheme – argued refusal of minister to allow her to remain after visa expired was contrary to her family rights – whether article 8 rights were engaged – lived as a family – family rights engaged – whether interference with family rights was necessary in a democratic society – only in exceptional circumstances that interference with family rights will displace a state’s entitlement to operate an immigration policy – approach of the minister was consistent with Article 8 – appeal dismissed
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
