0121 236 5514

Free Movement is the main blog read by immigration lawyers. They have linked to Chambers case law update. View link here.

Court of Appeal reviews law on deportation cases involving EU derived rights of residence

By Conor James McKinney

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Robinson (Jamaica) [2018] EWCA Civ 85 was a deportation appeal decided earlier in the year. Unusually for an appeal judgment, we didn’t discuss it on Free Movement at the time. But Adam Pipe of No.8 Chambers has included it in his handy review of 2018’s major immigration cases to date — so we thought we’d flag it up.

The case was about, among other things, the effect of the Court of Justice of the European Union decision in joined cases C-304/14 CS v UK and C-165/14 Rendón Marin v Spain. As Colin explained at the time, this ruling established that “Zambrano-like derived rights of residence under EU law are not automatically lost if a crime is committed. Instead, each case must be assessed on its merits and a judgment reached applying normal principles of EU law”.

In Robinson, the Court of Appeal summarised the impact of the CS/Marin judgment for the benefit of immigration judges dealing with deportation cases involving derived rights of residence under EU law. See paragraphs 57-63 in particular. Here is Adam’s one-sentence summary of what the court held:

Those with a derivative right of residence on Zambrano grounds must not [be] refused a residence permit on the sole ground that they have a criminal record, but deportation can be justified where the personal conduct of the third-country national constitutes a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat adversely affecting one of the fundamental interests of the society considering all relevant circumstances, in the light of the principle of proportionality.

The court went on to resolve what it called an “interesting debate” about whether C-30/77 R v Bouchereau is still good law. Lord Justice Singh, giving the lead judgment, held that it was: “past conduct alone, and ‘public revulsion’ in particular, may be sufficient to justify deportation of an offender”. That would only be in extreme cases, though. The facts of Robinson — conviction for supply of cocaine — were not at that level. Ms Robinson’s case was remitted to the Upper Tribunal for reconsideration, it having made errors of law in light of the CS/Marin principles.

No.8 News

No.8 Tenancy Opportunities

As part of our ongoing growth plan Chambers is currently looking to recruit tenants. Applications are welcome.

Michael BrooksWe are pleased to announce that Michael Brooks has joined No.8 Chambers.

Find a Barrister

Barrister Call
Lord Thomas OBE QC 1968
Daniel Janner QC 1980
Amanda White 1976
Carol Strongman 2003
Venice James 1983
Richard Franck 1993
Alison Scott-Jones 1991
Alexander Barnfield 2007
Sally Cairns 2006
Paul Hevingham 2006
Robert Cowley 1992
Saiqa Aslam 1995
Emma Rutherford 2002
Adam Pipe 1999
Stephen Vokes 1989
Philip Brunt 1991
Mark Jackson 1997
Mohammed Azmi 1998
Liz de Oliveira 2000
Harleen Masih 1999
Naomi Hobbs 1992
Davinder Dhaliwal 1990
Maninder Chaggar 1992
Gary Cook 1989
Ruth Manning 1993
James Fraczyk 2013
Arnela Imamovic 2008
Marc Beaumont 1985
Olumide Sobowale 1998
Michael Brooks 2007
Amanpreet Bhachu 2004

Contact No.8 Chambers

No.8 Chambers, Fountain Court, Birmingham B4 6DR
Tel: 0121 236 5514 | e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Fax: 0121 236 8225 | DX: 16078