Baarinsa & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appendix ROB: establishing wholly-owned subsidiary)
What was at stake
The case examines the legal effect of establishing a wholly‑owned subsidiary under Appendix ROB for an asylum seeker.
What happened
The applicants, Baarinsa and others, sought asylum in the UK and established a wholly-owned subsidiary under Appendix ROB to facilitate their claims. The case arose from the Secretary of State's refusal to recognize the legal standing of the subsidiary in relation to their asylum applications.
How the court got there
The court held that establishing a wholly-owned subsidiary under Appendix ROB does not affect the asylum seeker's eligibility for protection under the Refugee Convention. The decision emphasized that the legal framework must consider the subsidiary's role in supporting the asylum claim rather than dismissing it outright.
Statutes and cases cited
- § Refugee Convention art. 33
- Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister
Categories
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.