No irrationality in failing to provide e-visas to 3C migrants; R (RAMFEL) v SSHD
Immigration analysis: The Court of Appeal has ruled that the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) had not acted ‘irrationally’ by failing to provide biometric documents, or e-visa documents, to those migrants who have statutorily extended leave under section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 (IA 1971). The Court of Appeal also ruled that the SSHD, had not breached the purpose of the IA 1971, and so, had not acted contrary to the ‘Padfield’ principle. However, the question whether this non-provision has engaged statutory obligations under section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship, and Immigration Act 2009 (BCIA 2009) has been adjourned pending further arguments by both parties. Written by Parvez Anwar Pantho, caseworker at Duncan Lewis.