Immigration – Deportation. If the second stage of the evaluation under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been carried out on a correct legal basis, the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (the UT) could reasonably have decided that there had been very compelling circumstances sufficient to outweigh the public interest in the appellant’s deportation. Accordingly, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, set aside the UT’s decision, dismissing his appeal against the respondent Secretary of State’s deportation order and remitting the case for a further rehearing.
The judgment is available at:  EWCA Civ 2027
The appellant Nigerian national came to the UK with his mother when he was one-year old. He was now aged 27 and had no family or other ties with Nigeria. The appellant had been severely abused by his mother as a child and had been taken into care at the age of 15. He subsequently committed a series of criminal offences and, in 2013 (aged 20), was sentenced to various periods of detention in a Young Offenders’ Institution. That led to a decision by the respondent Secretary of State to make a deportation order against him.
The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (the UT) dismissed the appellant’s appeal from the Secretary of State’s decision and the appellant appealed on the ground that deporting him from the UK would breach his right to respect for his private life protected by art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.