Ikuga, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

This procedural judgment concerns permission to appeal. The Court of Appeal refused permission on two proposed points but granted permission on the point arising in Agyarko’s case and on a separate ground concerning the Secretary of State’s discretion when deciding whether there were insurmountable obstacles. The substantive appeal was not determined; judgment was reserved.

The Secretary of State appealed from the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) in proceedings concerning Ikuga. At the permission stage, the applicant advanced several points, including a point said to arise in Agyarko’s case and a challenge concerning the exercise of the Secretary of State’s discretion in deciding whether there were insurmountable obstacles.

The Court refused leave on the second and third points, but granted permission on the Agyarko point and on the first separate new ground. The substantive issues were left for judgment after further written submissions.

1. The Court of Appeal refused permission on the second and third points advanced by the applicant.
2. Permission was granted on the point arising in Agyarko’s case.
3. Permission was also granted on the first separate new ground, concerning whether the Upper Tribunal should have exercised the discretion available to the Secretary of State when deciding whether there were insurmountable obstacles.
4. Judgment was reserved. The court invited corrections to the draft judgment and directed that any further submissions be made in writing.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): permission granted on two proposed grounds and refused on two others; substantive judgment reserved, [2015] EWCA Civ 527 .
• Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber): decision under appeal; no citation is stated in the judgment.