Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Judge rules refugees in Calais must be brought to the UK Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should UK borders be opened to 'refugees' in Calais
    Yes
    7
    13.73%
    No
    44
    86.27%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    A judge rules refugees (including kids and adults) must be brought to the UK from Calais

    Surely this could open UK borders to tens if not hundreds of thousands of 'refugees'

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...in-judges-rule
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No thank you, it just encourages more to go there. The place should be bulldozed and protected by armed troops.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    4 people, whom have applied for asylum have been ordered to be let in, because they have family in the country.

    Unless these hypothetical hundreds of thousands of refugees living in squalor in calais all have relatives in the UK it doesn't set a precedent.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    A judge rules refugees (including kids and adults) must be brought to the UK from Calais

    Surely this could open UK borders to tens if not hundreds of thousands of 'refugees'

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...in-judges-rule
    So because these illegal economic migrants have relatives here they automatically get to ignore rules on refugees (entitled only in the first safe country they arrive at)? There's no way they'll return to France if their asylum claim is granted there.

    This just opens the flood-gates for dad to leave his family behind in the middle east, jump on a boat and illegally enter the UK, then demand his family are brought to join him.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    And most misleading thread title of the year goes tooooooooooooooooooooo.......... .....

    this one.

    Seriously? The article you linked is titled 'Four Syrian refugees must be brought from Calais camp to Britain, judges rule', FOUR, f, o, u, r. They have relatives in Britain too. The article also says they're Syrian, and they don't deserve the hellish situation in the Calais camp to escape the hellish situation in Syria.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craig1998)
    And most misleading thread title of the year goes tooooooooooooooooooooo.......... .....

    this one.

    Seriously? The article you linked is titled 'Four Syrian refugees must be brought from Calais camp to Britain, judges rule', FOUR, f, o, u, r. They have relatives in Britain too. The article also says they're Syrian, and they don't deserve the hellish situation in the Calais camp to escape the hellish situation in Syria.
    because the ruling will apply to anyone claiming it is not limited to those 4 people others will be allowed to make the same claim
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    A judge rules refugees (including kids and adults) must be brought to the UK from Calais

    Surely this could open UK borders to tens if not hundreds of thousands of 'refugees'

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...in-judges-rule
    No, he ruled that four specific refugees be allowed to enter for the purposes of family reunion. This does not open the border, it is a specific and limited decision pertaining to those four people specifically
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    because the ruling will apply to anyone claiming it is not limited to those 4 people others will be allowed to make the same claim
    You are completely wrong, it does not apply to anyone claiming. If there are broader implications, parliament can legislate to deal with the issue.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    No thanks i value the safety of my female relatives and friends
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    because the ruling will apply to anyone claiming it is not limited to those 4 people others will be allowed to make the same claim
    So you've randomly selected a news article from the thousands of other cases that have happened? Surely some other refugees would have applied to live in the UK with their families?

    Stop trying to scare people. There is a refugee crisis and thats not the way to solve it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Refugees should definitely be allowed into the UK.

    "Refugees" (economic migrants) should not be allowed into the UK unless through the standard procedure (getting a visa etc).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craig1998)
    So you've randomly selected a news article from the thousands of other cases that have happened? Surely some other refugees would have applied to live in the UK with their families?

    Stop trying to scare people. There is a refugee crisis and thats not the way to solve it.
    Build a wall and make them pay, that will solve it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craig1998)
    FOUR, f, o, u, r.
    (Original post by Gwilym101)
    Unless these hypothetical hundreds of thousands of refugees living in squalor in calais all have relatives in the UK it doesn't set a precedent.
    (Original post by RegencyTwink)
    No, he ruled that four specific refugees be allowed to enter for the purposes of family reunion. This does not open the border, it is a specific and limited decision pertaining to those four people specifically
    It is a legal precedent, under the human right to family life, that means any family that can infiltrate just one member into the country can expect that person to be allowed to pull the remainder of the family after them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    It is a legal precedent
    Which could be overturned on appeal, or for which parliament could legislate to overturn.

    Given the judgment hasn't yet been released, you are not in a position to say how broadly applicable this precedent is. Just because two cases share similarities in particular facts does not mean that one will necessarily be a precedent for the other, the material legal facts are what matters.

    under the human right to family life
    I see no evidence that this case was decided on Article 8 considerations; it looks to me it was decided with reference to the Dublin regulations (for which the UK has a home affairs opt-out). I await the release of the judgment with interest
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Didn't you read a recent article about the Calais jungle? A Dutch film maker was filming the conditions there when 3 migrants pinned him down and one tried to stab him.

    Do I want these scum who have no respect for British values to come over here? No I don't.

    As for the article, it's only four people who have family here. Not too bad but wouldn't let anyone in.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    It is a legal precedent, under the human right to family life, that means any family that can infiltrate just one member into the country can expect that person to be allowed to pull the remainder of the family after them.
    But surely the family in the uk have to be here legally?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gwilym101)
    But surely the family in the uk have to be here legally?
    Illegal immigrants who are caught normally claim asylum to legitimise their presence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    Didn't you read a recent article about the Calais jungle? A Dutch film maker was filming the conditions there when 3 migrants pinned him down and one tried to stab him.

    Do I want these scum who have no respect for British values to come over here? No I don't.

    As for the article, it's only four people who have family here. Not too bad but wouldn't let anyone in.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...in-Calais.html
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Why, they're in France, just stay there.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    It is a legal precedent, under the human right to family life, that means any family that can infiltrate just one member into the country can expect that person to be allowed to pull the remainder of the family after them.
    I was under the impression that was already a thing.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.