Application No. 12400/86
by Mrs. Mussarat NAZIR and Others
against the United Kingdom
The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private
on 8 May 1987, the following members being present:
MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President
G. SPERDUTI
F. ERMACORA
G. JÖRUNDSSON
G. TENEKIDES
S. TRECHSEL
B. KIERNAN
A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
J. C. SOYER
H. G. SCHERMERS
G. BATLINER
H. VANDENBERGHE
Mrs. G. H. THUNE
Sir Basil HALL
Mr. F. MARTINEZ
Mr. H. C. KRÜGER Secretary to the Commission
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 12 September
1986 by Mrs. Mussarat Nazir and Others against the United Kingdom and
registered on 22 September 1986 under file N° 12400/86;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the
Rules of Procedure of the Commission;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The first applicant, Mr. Mohammed Fiaz, is a citizen of
Pakistan who has been settled in the United Kingdom since 1966. He is
a businessman by profession.
The second applicant, Mrs. Mussarat Nazir, is the first
applicant's wife. They were married in 1969 in Pakistan. There are
five children in the family, born in 1970, 1973, 1976, 1979, 1981.
All of the children were born in Pakistan. The second applicant and
her children remained in Pakistan to look after an elderly relative,
who died in 1981, and subsequently for the children's education.
The applicants are represented before the Commission by
Messrs. Suriya & Co., Solicitors, London.
On 13 December 1984 the second applicant and her children came
to the United Kingdom to visit her husband. They were all refused
leave to enter but were granted temporary admission under the
Immigration Rules while an application for a visa was being
investigated. The application for a visa was eventually turned down
since the Immigration Officer did not consider that the family were
genuine visitors. All five children have been attending school since
their arrival in the United Kingdom.
On 7 March 1985 the second applicant and her children applied
to the Secretary of State for leave to stay in the United Kingdom as
the wife and children of the first applicant. To establish the family
link the applicants underwent DNA blood tests which they state to
be 100% accurate.
The Home Office suggested that the second applicant and
her children apply for leave to settle with the first applicant, in
accordance with the normal procedure, when they are back in Pakistan.
On 16 May 1986, after unsuccessful representations had been made to
the Secretary of State, the second applicant and her children were
informed that they were to be removed from the United Kingdom.
The first applicant then applied to the High Court on
20 May 1986 for judicial review of the order of removal, contending
that the order was unreasonable having regard to the family link and
the blood tests that had been carried out. This application was
rejected on 29 July 1986.
The blood tests confirmed that all of the children, except the
child born in 1970, were issue of the applicants' family. The
applicants concede that the first child was adopted by them when they
had no children.
Following the results of the blood tests the applicants were
informed that the Home Office was not taking any further action
against them to enable the family to stay together.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained of the Home Office decision to
remove the second applicant and her five children to Pakistan. They
invoked Articles 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced before the Commission on
12 September 1986 and registered on 22 September 1986. The Commission
decided on 7 October 1986 not to grant the applicants' request for an
indication to the respondent Government under Rule 36 of the Rules of
Procedure not to remove the second applicant and her family to
Pakistan.
On 24 February 1987 the applicants informed the Secretariat
that the Home Office no longer sought to remove the family from the
United Kingdom. They indicated that in these circumstances they no
longer sought to continue the application before the Commission.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The Commission notes that the applicants, whose expulsion is
no longer being sought by the Home Office, seek to withdraw their
application. The Commission finds that they no longer intend to
pursue their application and that there are no reasons relating to the
general interest to continue an examination of the application.
For these reasons, the Commission
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES
Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission
(H. C. KRUGER) (C. A. NØRGAARD)