- Cited — Hoque & Ors v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1) 2020-10-22
“…d to Lord Brown’s observations in the context of this very issue. However at para. 42 of his judgment in Pokhriyal v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1568 Jackson LJ noted a qualification to that approach in cases where a rule is ambiguous and the Secretary of State has in her published guidance adopted the inter…”
- Cited — Hoque & Ors v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1) 2020-10-22
“…vered from these. However, there is a qualification to this, noted by Jackson LJ (with whom Longmore LJ and Vos LJ (as he then was)) agreed in Pokhriyal v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 1568. Jackson LJ said:…”
- Cited — Hoque & Ors v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1) 2020-10-22
“…e generous to applicants on the basis of the Secretary of State’s statements about her practice, compare Pokhriyal v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1568 at paragraph 39. Secondly Underhill LJ’s analysis provides a meaning for the second exception which, as is pointed out by Underhill LJ at paragraph 35 of the j…”
- Cited — London St Andrew's College, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-11-08
“…re unhelpful and irrelevant. Alam v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 960, EK (Ivory Coast) v SSHD [2014] EWCA Civ 1517, Kaur v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 13 and Pokhriyal v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 1568 were appeals by individual migrants against decisions by the SSHD to refuse leave to remain, i.e. in a context where there is a premium on predictability and c…”
- Cited — Babar v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-03-01
“… this published policy, given that it is the construction which is more favourable to the applicant: see Pokhriyal v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1568 paras. 42-43 per Jackson LJ.…”
- Cited — Mudiyanselage v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-01-30
“…[2013] EWCA Civ 1568, [2014] INLR 291, Jackson LJ observed at para 4 that [the provisions of Part 6A] had ‘now achieved a degree of complexity which even the Byzantine emperors wou…”