Entry clearances – Public order offences – Reasons – Snoop dog

Cordozar Broadus (USA) v Entry Clearance Officer: CA (Civ Div) (Lords Justice Laws, Carnwath, Richards): 13 November 2008

The appellant entry clearance officer appealed against a decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal allowing an appeal by the respondent rap artist (B) against the refusal of the officer to allow him to enter the UK.

B, an American citizen who performed under the name Snoop Dogg, had been granted a work permit to work in the UK. B’s application for entry clearance to perform concerts was refused under rule 320(19) of the Immigration Rules on the basis that his presence was not conducive to the public good. The decision was based in part on the fact that on a previous visit to the UK, B and his entourage had been involved in public order offences for which B had received an adult caution. B’s appeal was allowed by an immigration judge. On a reconsideration the decision was upheld with the senior immigration judge ruling that there had been no material error of law in the immigration judge’s decision.

Held: (Carnwath LJ dissenting) The immigration judge had made a material error of law in her decision. When deciding what was conducive to the public good she held that it was for the officer to prove, on the balance of probabilities, whether B’s entrance would give rise to future public order offences or violent crime. The immigration judge failed to deal with the officer’s contention, namely the question of the evaluation of risk to the public. The immigration judge had failed to give adequate reasons for her decision and failed to give reasons for rejecting evidence supporting the officer’s case, N (Kenya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWCA Civ 1094, [2004] INLR 612 considered. The senior immigration judge should have acknowledged those errors in the context of the reconsideration. Accordingly, the matter had to be remitted.

Appeal allowed.

Jeremy Johnson (instructed by the (Treasury Solicitor) for the appellant; Lisa Giovannetti (instructed by Bates Wells & Braithwaite) for the respondent.