Profile description
Practice Areas
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Tasaddat is a public law practitioner and practices in all areas of judicial review.
ASYLUM LAW & HUMAN RIGHTS
Tasaddat presents asylum, human rights and deportation appeals at all levels before the IAC. He has undertaken a number of country guidance cases.
He is renowned for his work relating to Article 8 ECHR and is often retained by clients seeking a practitioner with a deep understanding of this rapidly evolving sphere of Human Rights law.
He regularly appears before the Court of Appeal on both asylum and human rights matters and has successfully conducted cases both as a junior and in his own right.
SPORTS IMMIGRATION
The increasing presence of foreign sportspeople in the United Kingdom, coupled with global sporting events, demonstrates the increasing importance and significance of immigration law in this particular sector. Tasaddat has a breadth of knowledge and understanding which is unrivalled, providing a bespoke and results-focussed service for international sporting clients.
IMMIGRATION LAW
Tasaddat undertakes commercial immigration work, representing and advising corporate clients in all aspects of commercial immigration and the points based system. Revocation of sponsorship licences for colleges and companies.
FAMILY LAW WITH IMMIGRATION DIMENSION
Tasaddat is regularly retained to advise on family matters with an immigration aspect. For example issues involving domicile, the relevance of on-going contact proceedings in deportation and immigration appeals and the rights of other family members, typically children and/or an estranged parent and the impact upon their rights from immigration decisions, highly specialist knowledge regarding s55 and the rights of the child.
Background & Experience
Tasaddat was called to the Bar in 1998 and began his practice in criminal and general common law. However, he soon found himself drawn to judicial review, human rights and immigration, which fitted more readily with his ideals and values.
With the benefit of 14 years' extensive experience in these fields, Tasaddat has become renowned for his expertise. An established, busy and well respected practitioner who is highly sought after with an excellent success rate.
What the Directories say
Chambers & Partners
Expertise: "I have always found him to be very knowledgeable and detailed in this field of work. He always approaches each case with enormous enthusiasm, and he will often go above and beyond what is required to assist in the progress of a case."
Pending Cases of Note for 2015
NN (Teachers; Matabeleland/Bulawayo; Risk) CG (CA)
Risk to teachers/former teachers from Matabeleland/Bulawayo
SU v United Kingdom (European Court of Human Rights)
The compatibility of the second-tier appeals test - s.13(6) Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 - With the absolute nature of Article 3 ECHR - Hearing date awaited.
MH & others (Pakistan) CA
New immigration rules post-9th July 2012 - ultra vires? Deportation, Article 8, s.55 - rights of the child. Proportionality. Proper approach. Separation of powers.
RA (Eritrea) UT HIV, lack of available medication/treatment in third country Article 8 moral and physical integrity.
DK (Zimbabwe) CG
HIV, Article 3, meaning of "significantly reduced life expectancy" & Article 8 ECHR.
Notable Reported Cases
HF (Iraq) & ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1276 (23 October 2013)
Returns to Iraq, Article 15c, weight to be attached to UNHCR, internal flight
Azimi-Moayed and others (Decisions affecting children; Onward appeals) Iran (Rev.1) [2013] UKUT 197 (IAC)
In this case the Upper Tribunal identified the applicable principles to assist in the determination of appeals where children are affected by the appealed decisions and provided guidance on the application of the Rule 25 reply procedure.
Zubair (EEA Regulations; self-employed persons) Pakistan [2013] UKUT 196 (IAC) (11th April 2013)
The provisions of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 concerning, respectively, self-employed persons and workers ultimately derive from different previous Directives and cannot be elided so as, for example, to create a concept of "self-employment seeking". Accordingly, a person cannot combine a period of self-employment with a period of seeking employment, so as to achieve a requisite period of residence under the Regulations.
NN (Teachers; Matabeleland/Bulawayo; Risk) Zimbabwe CG [2013] UKUT 198 (IAC)
Risk to teachers/former teachers from Matabeleland and Bulawayo.
Jahan A R Yarce v ECO (Madrid) [2012] UKUT 425 (IAC)
(1) The rules governing (and approach to be taken) in the assessment of "capital" and a sponsor's entitlement to state benefits and/or "recourse to public funds"; (2) their impact in immigration cases on the maintenance assessment under the Immigration Rules pre- and post-July 2012; (3)adequacy of maintenance from third-party support via a Quistclose trust pre- and post-July 2012; (4) Evidential burden and standard of proof in cases involving Quistclose trusts and third party support.
HM & others (Article 15(c)) Iraq CG [2012] UKUT 00409 (IAC) (13th November 2012) The lead CG case on returns to Iraq, risk categories, internal flight and internal armed conflict under Article 15(c).
MK (Documents - Relocation) Iraq CG ([2012] UKUT 00126 (IAC)) Women and Children, Internal flight, risk on return
PR (Sri Lanka), SS (Bangladesh), TC (Zimbabwe)[2011] EWCA Civ 988 Test cases on the application of the "second-tier appeals test" (under section 13(6) of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007) to immigration and asylum cases. "Realistic prospects of success" is not enough. Permission to appeal may only be given if there is an important point of principle or practice or "other compelling reason" for the Court of Appeal to hear the case: this must be "legally compelling".
T,R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 557 (Admin)
Fresh Claim - para 353 HC 395.
PRH v LSC [2011] EWHC 1323 (QB) Judicial Review against LSC immigration contract.
SM (Iran) [2010] EWCA Civ 371
Appeal Allowed by Court of Appeal because the AIT (as it was then) erred in law by: "reject[ing] the PTSD diagnosis out of hand and for these shaky negative reasons [failed] ..... to accord the ....anxious scrutiny which the case required." Appeal Allowed, Remitted with Costs
The Queen on the Application of Jia Fu Zhang v. The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWHC 3050 (Admin)
Secretary of State acted unlawfully in refusing to treat the Claimant's representations as amounting to a fresh claim under paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules. Secretary of State was order to reconsider her decision in accordance with the law.
JT (Cameroon) [2008] EWCA Civ 878
Whether it was lawful for the Tribunal to place determinative weight upon particular conduct identified under s8 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004 as damaging the credibility of a Claimant to such an extent that it outweighed (a) accepted supporting medical evidence confirming scarring inflicted from torture in a manner and at a time consistent with the core of the claim, (b) supporting objective evidence of the treatment meted out to the claimant and (c) corroborating oral evidence from witnesses.
The Court of Appeal interpreted s8 the Asylum & Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004 to ensure compatibility with the overriding duty to apply close and anxious scrutiny to an asylum and human rights claim. Despite there being no apparent ambiguity in the clear wording of the provision, the court went on to insert an additional word so that the provision would not offend the doctrine of separation of powers and implicitly, the right to a fair hearing.
“When construing s 8(1) of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004, which provided various factors that the court should take account of in assessing the credibility of an asylum seeker, the qualifying word ‘potentially’ should be read into an explanatory clause which would then read: ‘as (potentially) damaging the claimant’s credibility’.” Appeal allowed and remitted to AIT. Upon remittal, Home Office conceded appeal and granted refugee status.
Ali v. Law Society (No. 21 of 2007) {2008] EWCA Civ 769
Guideline case before the Master of the Rolls on the principles governing the conduct of the SRA’s Adjudicator Panel when investigating allegations of dishonesty against its members. Appeal allowed and Petitioner reinstated.
RZ (Eurodac – fingerprint match - admissible) Eritrea [2008] UKAIT 00007
Guidelines for the admissibility of finger print evidence stored on the EU finger print data base. The principles governing the use of such evidence, the burden and standard of proof to be applied when evidence was produced by the system of past claims in order to expose deception in the current asylum application.
SH (Bangladesh) v. SSHD [2007] EWCA Civ 1196
Women in Bangladesh form a particular social group under the Refugee Convention.
KJ (Entry Clearance Proportionality) Iraq CG [2005] UKIAT 00066
Removal from United Kingdom to Iraq in order to apply for entry clearance in Jordan held to be an unlawful interference with right to family life, under Article 8 ECHR.
Acted in a large and complex matter representing a voluntary sector organisation in a multiple claimant judicial review against a local authority. Successfully settled with costs.
HD (Prison Conditions Iran - Record of Proceedings ECHR Article 3) Iran [2004] UKIAT 0020
Political prisoners and prison conditions; breach of Article 3 ECHR.
Re B [1999] 2 AC 136 House of Lords
Duties of a court in determining whether to make an adoption order, and thereby grant British Citizenship, which would have the effect of circumventing the provisions of the Immigration Act 1971.
Connect with Tasaddat Hussain on LinkedIn:
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/tasaddat-hussain/51/382/23b
© Broadway House Chambers/Tasaddat Hussain
Email Tasaddat Hussain
Download V-Card
Notable Cases/Recent Work
In the News
