Where a ministerial direction requires consideration of a non-citizen's 'health' as an impediment to removal, a tribunal's extensive awareness of an alcohol dependency disorder in other parts of its reasoning does not satisfy the obligation to separately address that condition under the health consideration, and failure to do so constitutes jurisdictional error where there is a realistic possibility the decision could have been different.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 18 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 18 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.