Temple Garden Chambers is a leading common law set based in London and The Hague.
With excellence from top to bottom Chambers provides a first class service in a number of different fields.
Court of Appeal decision on temporary exclusion orders. Robin Tam KC instructed by GLD. The Court of Appeal decided that Article 6 ECHR applies to a review of the imposition of a TEO if that has been followed by the…
Robin Tam KC represented The Secretary of State who cancelled C1’s indefinite leave to remain after he had departed the United Kingdom, using the power in Article 13(7) of the Immigration (Leave to Enter and Remain) Order 2000, which provides…
Robin Tam KC and Emily Wilsdon appeared for the Home Secretary when successfully resisting an appeal, potentially affecting a large number of people, about whether the Secretary of State has the power to place a person on bail under para….
The Supreme Court upheld a Court of Appeal decision that an asylum appeal determination is not automatically a nullity even if the applicable fast-track procedure was systemically flawed. Robin Tam KC and Natasha Barnes (of 1COR) represented the Home Secretary…
The Court considered whether a Deportation Liability Notice (DLN) issued by the Secretary of State to an EEA national was a “measure” or a “decision” for the purposes of the Citizens’ Directive. Robin Tam KC & William Irwin represented The…
Challenge to the lawfulness of the Secretary of State’s policy regarding grants of leave to remain to potential victims of human trafficking. Robin Tam KC and William Irwin represented the Secretary of State. The Claimant was a New Zealand national…
The Supreme Court considered whether an unlawful immigration curfew constituted the tort of false imprisonment, and whether the common law tort should be aligned with caselaw on article 5 of the ECHR. In its judgment, given by Lady Hale, the…
Following a three-day hearing in the Administrative Court, Lewis J found that a curfew imposed on a foreign national offender was unlawful as it was imposed pursuant to an unpublished policy about curfews, and because the Claimant was not afforded…
The appellants, who all had extant leave to remain in the UK, applied in time for further leave to remain. They could have benefited from section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 extending their leave until after their applications had…
The claimants were all foreign criminals whose deportation was generally required by section 32 of the UK Borders Act 2007. The Court of Appeal considered the way in which the Immigration Rules in force before 28 July 2014 should be…
