RA (Iraq) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant)
Case ID: 2020/0175
In what circumstances is it “unduly harsh” to deport a foreign criminal in light of that person’s family life in the United Kingdom, and when are there “very compelling circumstances” against deportation?
HA and RA are non-British nationals from Iraq. Both of them are in settled relationships with British women and they both have a child or children who are British nationals. They both committed criminal offences for which they were sentenced, HA to 16 months’ imprisonment and RA to 12 months’ imprisonment.
The Secretary of State decided to deport HA and RA but they each successfully appealed to the First-tier Tribunal. Following the Secretary of State’s successful appeal to the Upper Tribunal, the Upper Tribunal remade the deportation decision in each of their cases. The Upper Tribunal decided that the effect of HA’s or RA’s deportation on their partner and children would not be “unduly harsh” under section 117C(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and that there were no “very compelling circumstances” which would make deportation a disproportionate interference with HA’s or RA’s Article 8 ECHR rights (or the Article 8 rights of their partners or children) under section 117C(6). HA and RA appealed to the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal allowed their appeals. The Secretary of State now appeals to the Supreme Court.
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lord Stephens, Lord Lloyd–Jones
Hearing start date
17 May 2022
Hearing finish date
18 May 2022
|17 May 2022||Morning session||Afternoon session|
|18 May 2022||Morning session||Afternoon session|
20 July 2022
 UKSC 22
- Judgment (PDF)
- Press summary (HTML version)
- Judgment on The National Archives (HTML version)
- Judgment on BAILII (HTML version)
|Watch Judgment summary|
|20 July 2022||Judgment summary|