Appellant fails without reasonable excuse to take reasonable steps to place themselves in a position in which they are able to leave the United Kingdom – applying Paragraph 7(A)(1)(ii) of Schedule 3 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 as amended by Section 9 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004.
Appellant’s asylum claim had been refused (together with their appeal). The appellant no longer has status in the United Kingdom and was required to leave.
Consideration given to whether or not there was a breach of the appellant’s human rights – as required by Paragraph 3 of the Schedule. Consideration of SSHD v Limbuela, Tesema and Adam  EWCA Civ 540 to the facts of the appeal. Consideration of a breach of the appellant’s Article 8 rights – applying R v SSHD ex parte Razgar  UKHL 27.
Article 8 right not violated. Appellant has retained a right to contact with a child – even if placed in care.
Appellant has to take reasonable steps to place himself in a position in which he is able to leave is such that it is “persistent and unequivocal” – applying R v Kensington and Chelsea ex parte Kujtim  2CCLR 340.
read the full decision in