This is some case law Paul (Neville) flagged up in past postings
In Secretary of State for the Home Department and another ex parte Anufrijeva (2003) HL, Lord Steyn, at paragraph 26, stated:- “The arguments for the Home Secretary ignore fundamental principles of our law. Notice of a decision is required before it can have the character of a determination with legal effect because the individual concerned must be in a position to challenge the decision in the courts if he or she wishes to do so. This is not a technical rule. It is simply an application of the right of access to justice. That is a fundamental and constitutional principle of our legal system: Raymond v Honey <1983> 1AC 1, 10G per Lord Wilberforce; R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Leech, <1994> QB 198, 209D; R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Simms <2000> 2 AC 115”.
Tactics - engage local MP, Write to PS regional/District managers, as a way of bypassing local PS office impasse.
|