Search results
1. This appeal is concerned with the Secretary of State’s policy that certain people claiming asylum in the United Kingdom should not have their claims considered here, but should instead be sent to Rwanda in order to claim asylum there.
Dec 18, 2023 · Upholding an earlier decision by the court of appeal, the supreme court found that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda may be at risk of refoulement – being sent back to a country where they may be persecuted, tortured or killed. The courts cited extensive evidence from the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) that Rwanda does not respect the principle of non ...
Nov 15, 2023 · The Supreme Court upheld a Court of Appeal ruling, which said the policy leaves people sent to Rwanda open to human rights breaches. It means the policy cannot be implemented in its current...
Nov 15, 2023 · In a landmark and unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court has upheld the earlier Court of Appeal ruling in AAA v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 745 that the Government’s policy of sending asylum-seekers to Rwanda is unlawful.
Nov 15, 2023 · The UK supreme court has unanimously ruled that the government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is unlawful. Upholding an earlier decision by the court of appeal, the supreme court found...
- Devyani Prabhat
Aug 29, 2024 · This analysis explores the rulings by the UK domestic courts on the issue of Rwanda’s safety (collectively referred to as the Rwanda Case) which culminated in the Supreme Court decision in R (AAA (Syria) and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department.
People also ask
What did the Supreme Court say about Rwanda?
Is the ECHR a practical obstacle to the Rwanda policy?
Is Rwanda's removal policy illegal?
Could deported people be sent to a safe place in Rwanda?
Nov 15, 2023 · The decision is a surprise in one way: the Supreme Court under Reed (who succeeded Baroness Hale as president) is considered by many commentators as being deferential on “policy” matters.
