See also the page on Repatriation.

The pages below are initially ordered according to the dates on which they were added to the site (most recent first). The order can be changed by clicking on the symbol beside a column heading: click on the symbol beside "Page and summary" for alphabetical order; click beside "Categories" for the order in which the cases were reported. Click on the arrow symbol again to reverse the order. Click on a page name to view the relevant page.

Page and summary	Date added to site	Categories
R (AK) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 3188 (Admin) — Immigration case with mental health element. [Summary required.]	2011-12-10	2011 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (BA) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 2748 (Admin) — Judicial review of detention pending deportation (psychiatric background). [Summary required.]	2011-11-14	2011 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
Magritz v Public Prosecutors Office Bremen (2011) EWHC 1861 (Admin) — In relation to the claimant's extradition, where the sentence was for him to be 'placed in a psychiatric hospital for an indefinite period of time': (1) section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 (the purpose of which is to protect a requested person whose physical or mental health is so poor that the act of extradition would be oppressive or unjust) was not engaged; and (2) there would be no breach of Article 3, Article 5 or Article 8.	2011-08-22	2011 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (FB) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 2044 (Admin) — Unlawful detention case involving mentally-ill immigrant. [Summary required.]	2011-08-22	2011 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (S) v SSHD (2011) EWHC 2120 (Admin) — Detention of mentally-ill immigrant was unlawful under common law and Article 5, and breached Articles 3 and 8.	2011-08-16	2011 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (AA) v SSHD (2010) EWHC 2265 (Admin) — Case involving immigrant with mental illness. [Summary required.]	2011-08-09	2010 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (MK) v SSHD (2010) EWCA Civ 115 — Case involving immigrant with mental illness. [Summary required.]	2011-08-09	2010 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (OM (Nigeria)) v SSHD (2010) EWHC 2147 (Admin) — Case involving immigrant with mental illness. [Summary required.]	2011-08-09	2010 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (Monday) v SSHD (2010) EWHC 3079 (Admin) — There was no prospect (for psychiatric reasons) of deportation of the claimant within a reasonable period, so ongoing detention would be unlawful.	2011-04-30	2010 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
Anam v SSHD (2010) EWCA Civ 1140 — This appeal concerns the Secretary of State for the Home Department's powers of detention under paragraph 2(3) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971 and the implications of his failure to have regard, when exercising those powers to detain the Appellant, to his own policy as set out in a document entitled "Enforcement Instructions and Guidance". [Summary required.]	2010-10-27	2010 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (OM (Algeria)) v SSHD (2010) EWHC 65 (Admin) — OM was a failed asylum seeker facing deportation at the end of a criminal sentence. The Secretary of State's operational guidance stated that the mentally ill are normally considered suitable for detention in only very exceptional circumstances: he was unable to justify the detention according to this policy, and therefore it was unlawful. Detention was also unlawful because the claimant had not been notified of his in-country right of appeal.	2010-07-12	2010 cases, Detailed summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (MJ (Angola)) v SSHD (2010) EWCA Civ 557 — (1) The MHA regime and the Immigration Act 1971 run in parallel in relation to a person who is both an immigrant and mentally ill, so the SSHD was entitled to decide to deport MJ notwithstanding that he was still subject to s37/41. (2) There is no express statutory limitation on the SSJ's power to discharge under the MHA; it can be used in order to facilitate deportation; the protection for the patient is that the power must be exercised rationally and without breaching his Convention rights. (3) For a settled migrant who has lawfully spent all or most of his childhood in the host country, especially where he committed the relevant offences as a juvenile, very serious reasons are required to justify expulsion; the AIT had not appreciated that very serious reasons were needed so the appeal was granted.	2010-05-22	2010 cases, Detailed summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (MC (Algeria)) v SSHD (2010) EWCA Civ 347 — Unsuccessful challenge to lawfulness of detention under Schedule 3 Immigration Act 1971 which was mainly based on failure to have regard to policy that mentally ill should be detained only in very exceptional circumstances. [Summary required.]	2010-04-11	2010 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
MK (Mental Illness, Articles 3 and 8) Pakistan (2005) UKIAT 00075 — Consideration of the approach to the availability of treatment and the assessment of Article 3 and 8 cases in an immigration context. [Summary required.]	2010-04-11	2005 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
KH (Afghanistan) v SSHD (2009) EWCA Civ 1354 — Save in very exceptional cases, withdrawal of medical treatment as a result of ordering return of a failed asylum-seeker would not constitute a violation of Article 3. In order for a case to be "very exceptional" it would have to be exceptional inside the class of person with mental illness without family support: perhaps a very old or very young person would qualify but hardly an ordinary adult. The appellant's was not such a case.	2010-03-26	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
Anam v SSHD (2009) EWHC 2496 (Admin) — It is the Secretary of State's policy not to detain mentally ill persons pending deportation, save in "very exceptional circumstances". The claimant was entitled to a declaration that the SoS had unlawfully failed to consider the implications of his policy; however, the detention was not in breach of the policy, and continued detention was lawful.	2009-12-04	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (McKinnon) v SSHA (2009) EWHC 2449 (Admin) — Asperger's Syndrome hacker extradition case: no permission to apply for JR on Article 8 grounds; no certificate on points of law of general public importance on the Article 3 grounds; no permission to appeal.	2009-10-09	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
Jansons v Latvia (2009) EWHC 1845 (Admin) — It would be oppressive under s25 Extradition Act 2003, and contrary to his Article 8 rights, for the Latvian criminal to be extradited, because there was a substantial risk that he would commit suicide.	2009-10-08	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (McKinnon) v SSHA (2009) EWHC 2021 (Admin) — Because of the claimant's Asperger's Syndrome, extradition to the US would cause his mental health to suffer and would create risks including suicide; however, his case did not approach Article 3 severity: the SSHA's decision to order extradition, and the DPP's decision not to prosecute in the UK (although he had admitted certain offences), were lawful.	2009-08-10	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (Krishnapillai) v SSHD (2008) EWHC 2737 (Admin) — Mental health problems can engage Article 8 and render it disproportionate to separate a failed asylum seeker from the support of his family (in this case the mental health element involved PTSD, depression and the threat of suicide); however, deportation in this case was lawful.	2009-08-09	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (Chahboub) v SSHD (2009) EWHC 1989 (Admin) — Failed asylum seeker's challenge to detention in prison rather than immigration centre. (1) The first of the two periods of detention was outside the 3-month JR time limit so permission was refused in respect of that period. (2) The policy with respect to whether mentally ill people should be detained did not apply to the claimant, who had a personality disorder rather than mental illness. (3) The detention was justified under common law (intention to deport, detention for reasonable period, deportation possible in reasonable period, reasonable diligence to deport). (4) His transfer from the immigration centre to prison, because he had proved unmanageable, was in accordance with policy. (5) The manner of his detention in prison (required to share cell with convicted prisoner, dietary requirements ignored, 23-hour lock-up, limited access to telephone and visitors) was contrary to policy and breached his Article 5 rights.	2009-08-09	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
MJ (Angola) v SSHD (2009) EWCA Civ 741 — The SSJ should be served with the appeal proceedings as the court would be assisted by information from him as to the policy and objects as he sees them of s42 MHA (discharge power) in the context of a deportation case.	2009-07-23	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
RA (Sri Lanka) v SSHD (2008) EWCA Civ 1210 — Unsuccessful human rights appeal against deportation made by suspected terrorist: the article 3 claim being based on (1) a fear of being ill-treated in Sri Lanka on account of actual or suspected involvement with the Tamil Tigers; (2) mental health and in particular the risk of suicide if returned; the article 8 claim being based on the risk of suicide and interference with the private life established in the UK.	2009-06-15	2008 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
Y (Sri Lanka) v SSHD (2009) EWCA Civ 362 — The appellants, who had been tortured as suspected terrorists or terrorist sympathisers before travelling from Sri Lanka to the UK, successfully resisted deportation on Article 3 grounds by claiming that they would commit suicide if returned (even though there was no objective foundation for any fear of ill-treatment).	2009-05-04	2009 cases, Brief summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (X) v SSHD (2000) EWCA Civ 3026 — "This appeal from Turner J is concerned with the interrelation of the Immigration Act 1971, the Mental Health Act 1983, and the Human Rights Act 1998 and with the effect of an immigrant's mental illness on the Home Secretary's powers to refuse to grant him exceptional leave to enter or remain."	2009-04-11	2000 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (X) v SSHD (2000) EWHC 647 (Admin) — "This is an application for judicial review of the decision of an immigration officer dated 28 May 1999, by which he refused to grant the applicant exceptional leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom and enforced his removal to Malta."	2009-04-11	2000 cases, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (Razgar) v SSHD (2003) EWCA Civ 840 — The Secretary of State cannot lawfully certify that an immigration claim is manifestly unfounded unless the claim is bound to fail before an adjudicator; it it not enough that it is very likely to fail. All three claimants had already claimed asylum in safe European countries before claiming asylum again in the UK; the challenges to the Secretary of State's decisions were based on Article 3 and/or 8 and mental health consequences of removal.	2009-01-14	2003 cases, Brief summary, ECHR, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (Razgar) v SSHD (2004) UKHL 27 — The claimant was an Iraqi asylum seeker who had already sought asylum in Germany, but claimed that his return to Germany would adversely affect his mental health. (1) In principle, Article 8 rights can be engaged by the foreseeable consequences for health of removal from the UK pursuant to an immigration decision, even where such removal does not violate Article 3, if the facts relied on by the applicant are sufficiently strong. (2) On the facts, the Home Secretary's decision to certify the claim as manifestly unfounded was unlawful, as an adjudicator could have properly ruled in the claimant's favour.	2009-01-14	2004 cases, Brief summary, ECHR, Repatriation cases, Transcript
Bensaid v UK 44599/98 (2001) ECHR 82 — The deportation to Algeria of a patient suffering from schizophrenia did not breach Articles 3, 8 or 13.	2008-11-27	2001 cases, ECHR, No summary, Repatriation cases, Transcript
R (X) v SSHD (2000) EWCA Civ 311 — Home Office can repatriate using either Immigration Act 1971 or Mental Health Act 1983.	2008-09-12	2000 cases, Brief summary, Ministry of Justice, Repatriation cases, Transcript