John Walsh

j.walsh@doughtystreet.co.uk

Year of Call

1993
John Walsh
Profile

John represents clients in immigration tribunals, parole hearings and the Administrative Tribunal.   He appears before the High Court and Court of Appeal and has had an impressive success rate before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

 

He takes cases on public access and undertakes work on a CFA basis as well as legal aid and privately funded cases.  He undertakes cases for the Bar Pro Bono Unit and the Free Representation Unit.

 

John practises in immigration and  asylum law,  appearing frequently before the  Immigration and Asylum  Chamber of the  Upper  Tribunal  and  First-Tier  Tribunal  in all areas of immigration law, including refugee, human rights, family, EEA, student, points-based system, and  deportation cases.  He also represents in other public law areas such as education (especially those with an EU law element) and prison law cases.

 

John is recommended by Chambers and Partners: A seasoned immigration barrister, he routinely undertakes public access work as well as legal aid and privately funded matters. He has notable experience of advising on family-related immigration and unlawful detention cases. He draws on his EU and prison law expertise to offer a finely tuned service.  Excellent knowledge of EU free movement law. He stands out as an engaging advocate’.

 

John is chair of a charity campaigning for elderly Irish, prisoners and travellers (The Irish Chaplaincy in Britain). He is also a Trustee of two other charities involved  with the provision of basic services to refused asylum applicants (Notre  Dame  Refugee Centre) and to keep his local library open (Friends of Kensal Rise Library).

European Law

A particular and long-standing expertise John has is in the area of European Union law.  He is co-author of the leading textbook on EU freedom of movement: Freedom of movement of Persons in the Enlarged European Union (Sweet and Maxwell). He succeeded in persuading the Court of Justice that the proposed deportation of a third country national, and wife of a British national who carried out some business across EU borders, was contrary to EU law:C-60/00 Carpenter [2002] I.N..R.439..  He succeeded in the  landmark case of C-37/98 Savas which held  that a standstill clause in an Agreement between the  EU and  Turkey had  direct effect  with the  result that immigration rules in place when  the  UK became a member of the  EEC are  the  applicable rules  when  assessing if Turkish business people can  enter or remain in the  UK. In C-186/10 Oguz [2012] 1 W.L.R. 709, the Court of Justice accepted the submission that the developing abuse principle in EU law did not restrict the application of the standstill clause.  He gives seminars to lawyers and others on the potential impact of Brexit.

In the  domestic courts he has  argued successfully that the  Home Office breached its duty  of fairness and  EU law by  construing immigration rules  in such  a  way  as  to  restrict the  freedom of Turkish business people to  do  business in the  UK: KA (Turkey) v  Secretary of  State for  the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 1183. He sought to protect, unsuccessfully, in the Court of Appeal the favourable decision of the Administrative Court that to remove a young Nigerian woman who had lived in the UK since she was fourteen years of age was unlawful as contrary to the Immigration Rules: R (on the application of Akpan) [2015] EWCA Civ 1266;[2015] EWHC 331.

Other noteworthy cases are  Case T-318/01 Othman,  Court  of First  Instance, involving  challenge to the  freezing of funds  in respect of terrorist suspects and  SA (Divorced Women) Bangladesh CG [2011] UKUT 00254 on divorced women and  their  children in Bangladesh.

John has been consulted in many cases in the Family Courts for advice on the immigration status of children which were the subject of care proceedings.  The Courts  often required an  opinion  on the likely long-term immigration status of children in the  UK.

Another feature of his practice are unlawful  detention cases in the County Court  and  High Court.   He  won significant damages in the  County  Court  for a client  who  had  been detained for an  unreasonable period of time  while the  Home  Office sought to remove him to Algeria.   He succeeded in the  High Court  in winning  damages for a women and  her  children who  were  detained with  a view to  their removal from the  UK: see N v SSHD [2012] All ER (D) 187.

John succeeded in the  Administrative Tribunal  in getting the  Tribunal  to quash a decision of the  Independent Safeguarding Authority  (the  predecessor to the  Disclosure and  Barring Service) in respect of a person whose name was put on the  child barring list due  to a conviction: SR v Disclosure and  Barring Service [2013] 0103 (AAC).

In  Weszka v  Ministry  of  Justice [2012]  EWHC 287, John  represented in  a  case in  the Administrative Court  that concerned the  decision of a Parole  Board  refusing to order  the  release of a prisoner, sentenced to  life imprisonment.   The Administrative Court accepted the argument that fairness demanded that the  Parole  Board  should  have adjourned the hearing for the  prisoner to consider police evidence adduced at a late  stage and  for his representative to take instructions on it.

Immigration Asylum and Personal

Family Courts

John has been consulted in many cases in the Family Courts for advice on the immigration status of children which were the subject of care proceedings.  The Courts often required an opinion on the likely long-term immigration status of children in the UK.

Unlawful detentions

Another feature of his practice are unlawful detention cases in the County and High Court.  He  won significant damages in the County Court for a client who had been detained for an unreasonable period of time while the Home Office sought to remove him to Algeria.  He succeeded in the High Court in winning damages for a women and her children who were detained with a view to their removal from the UK:see N v SSHD [2012] All ER (D) 187

Prison Law and Criminal Justice

John represents prisoners before parole boards including lifers.

In Weszka v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 287, John represented in a case in the Administrative Court that concerned the decision of a Parole Board refusing to order the release of a prisoner, sentenced to life imprisonment.   The Administrative Court accepted the argument that fairness demanded that the Parole Board should have adjourned the hearing for the prisoner to consider police evidence adduced at a late stage and for his representative to take instructions on it.

Administrative and Public Law

John represents prisoners before parole boards including lifers.

John succeeded in a recent case before the Administrative Tribunal in getting the Tribunal to quash a decision of the Independent Safeguarding Authority (the predecessor to the Disclosure and Barring Service) in respect of a person whose name was put on the child barring list due to a conviction: SR v Disclosure and Barring Service [2013] 0103 (AAC).

In Weszka v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 287, John represented in a case in the Administrative Court that concerned the decision of a Parole Board refusing to order the release of a prisoner, sentenced to life imprisonment.   The Administrative Court accepted the argument that fairness demanded that the Parole Board should have adjourned the hearing for the prisoner to consider police evidence adduced at a late stage and for his representative to take instructions on it.

 

Education

BA (Hons)

LLB (Hons)

MA (Hons. London)

MA (Hons. Dublin)

 

Memberships

Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association

Bar European Group

About cookies on our website

Following a revised EU directive on website cookies, each company based, or doing business, in the EU is required to notify users about the cookies used on their website.

Our site uses cookies to improve your experience of certain areas of the site and to allow the use of specific functionality like social media page sharing. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but as a result parts of the site may not work as intended.

To find out more about what cookies are, which cookies we use on this website and how to delete and block cookies, please see our Which cookies we use page.

Click on the button below to accept the use of cookies on this website (this will prevent the dialogue box from appearing on future visits)