Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home  Phrase:immigration carriers liability act

Dec 09 2004

Regina Vs. Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another (Responde ...

  • Decided on : 09-Dec-2004

Court : House of Lords

..... have then been enforced by the imposition of heavy financial penalties on those transport operators bringing passengers lacking a valid visa where one is required. for example, under the immigration (carriers' liability) act 1987, the united kingdom authorities impose a financial penalty of 2,000 per passenger brought without either a valid passport or a valid visa where one is required. introducing ..... ) are inimical to it. have the states in practice observed such a rule? it seems to me clear that they have not. 28. section 1 of the immigration (carriers' liability) act 1987 provided that where a person requiring leave to enter the united kingdom arrived in this country by ship or by aircraft and failed to produce a visa where required ..... , published in february 1999, showed that all states parties to the schengen convention, plus norway and iceland, who had concluded a parallel convention, had introduced a system of carriers' liability. of 17 western european countries only ireland and switzerland, at that time, had not. there was no evidence before the house to show the effect on prospective applicants for ..... also intended to stop abuse of asylum procedures by preventing people travelling here without valid documents and then claiming asylum before they can be returned'. the logical necessity for carriers' liability to support a visa regime is surely self-evident. why require visas from certain countries (and in particular those from which most bogus asylum seekers are found to come .....

Tag this Judgment!
May 21 2008

R Vs. Asfaw (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal ...

  • Decided on : 21-May-2008

Court : House of Lords

..... they carry passengers to a country which they will not be permitted to enter because they have no valid passport or its visa requirements are not satisfied. the immigration (carriers liability) act 1987 requires carriers to make payments to the secretary of state in respect of passengers brought by them by ship or aircraft to the united kingdom without proper documents, currently ..... have then been enforced by the imposition of heavy financial penalties on those transport operators bringing passengers lacking a valid visa where one is required. for example, under the immigration (carriers liability) act 1987, the united kingdom authorities impose a financial penalty of 2,000 per passenger brought without either a valid passport or a visa where one is required. introducing ..... amounting to 2,000 per passenger. (the 1987 act was repealed by the immigration and asylum act 1999, section 169(3) and schedule 16 as from a date to be appointed, and replaced by a new system of carriers liability under sections 40 and 42. but no date for the taking effect of these provisions ..... has yet been appointed.) carriers who carry passengers from the united kingdom without proper documents are exposed .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jun 21 2013

Island Aviation Services Limited. Vs. The Government of India and Othe ...

  • Decided on : 21-Jun-2013

Court : Mumbai

..... personal hearing. 9. it is clarified that we have not permitted learned counsel for the petitioner to raise the challenge to the constitutional validity of section 3 of the immigration (carriers' liability) act. in future , if necessary, it will be open to the petitioner to raise such a challenge. 10. rule is made absolute accordingly to the above extent. ..... on her passport. respondentsauthorities have, therefore, held the petitionerairline, to have contravened the provisions of the passport (entry into india) act, 1920 and the rules thereunder and have imposed penalty of rs.1 lac under section 3 of the immigration (carriers' liability) act,2000. 3. in view of the order that we propose to pass, it is not necessary to set out all the ..... 22 january 2013 of the frro cum civil authorityrespondent no.4, as well as the appellate order by government of india, in the ministry of home affairs, foreigners division (immigration section) dated 5 march 2013 are set aside and respondent no.4 is directed to give fresh hearing to the petitioner. the petitioner will be given atleast two weeks' advance ..... , the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22 january 2013 passed by the ffro cum civil authority, bureau of immigration, mumbai (exh.h) as confirmed by the appellate authority being government of india in the ministry of home affairs, foreigners division (immigration section) through its joint secretary (exh.j). 2. in the impugned orders, respondentsauthorities have held that the petitionerairline .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 20 2014

Air India Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Anr.

  • Decided on : 20-Aug-2014

Court : Delhi

..... 06.2014 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned order ) passed by respondent no.1. by the impugned order, the appeal preferred under section 4 of the immigration (carriers liability) act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the act ) against the order dated 25.11.2013 passed by foreigners regional registration officer (frro) cum civil authority, amritsar respondent no.2, was dismissed by the respondent ..... penalty on the petitioner for the alleged violation of provisions of the passport (entry into india) act, 1920 and rules made thereunder. the allegation against the petitioner was that the petitioner had transported a passenger to amritsar who had not cleared his immigration at the delhi airport; the passenger had been transported without a valid visa. the petitioner states ..... delhi by the return flight, however, this was not done because the said passenger was distressed and had arrived in india on account of demise of his mother. the immigration authorities at amritsar had considered the mitigating circumstances and cleared the passenger. the petitioner submits that in this view, the levy of penalty is onerous and highly disproportionate. in ..... application for condoning the delay of 8 days was filed, however, the said application has not been considered by the respondent.7. although, section 4(2) of the act provides that every appeal be preferred within a period of thirty days, it is also provides that on sufficient cause being shown, the central government may permit the appellant to .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jan 06 1930

Luckenbach Steamship Company v. United States

  • Decided on : 06-Jan-1930

Court : US Supreme Court

..... port or place," ruled that the ports in the canal zone should be deemed foreign ports in the sense of that act, par. 4, rule 6, immigration laws and rules of 1925, and in 1926 the comptroller general held that, as ports in the canal zone are considered foreign ..... to the seamen of all vessels of the united states when in the canal zone. in 1925, the department of labor, construing a provision in the immigration act of february 5, 1917, c. 29, 39 stat. 874, relating to seamen on board vessels arriving in the united states from "any foreign ..... to extradition and the rendition of fugitives from justice, and in the acts relating to the liability of carriers by railroad for injuries suffered by their employees, act april 22, 1908, page 280 u. s. 181 c. 149, 35 stat. 65; to espionage, act june 15, 1917, c. 30, title 13, 40 stat. 231 ..... of the government, and continued for nine years through six different administrations of that department -- a construction which, though inconsistent with the literalism of the act, certainly consorts with the equities of the case -- should be considered as decisive in this suit. it is a settled doctrine of this court ..... , and to sabotage, act april 20, 1918, c. 59, 40 stat. 533. but the purposes for which these special provisions were made were such that nothing was subtracted thereby from the force of the provisions before mentioned, wherein, for purposes connected with importation, immigration and ocean transportation between the united .....

Tag this Judgment!
Sep 19 2013

AIR INDIA LTD. Vs. TEJ SHOE EXPORTERS P. LTD. AND ANR

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2013

Court : Delhi

..... is therefore clearly barred by limitation. furthermore, submitted learned senior counsel ms. gita luthra, the single judge overlooked that under the provisions of the 1972 act, a carrier s liability is limited to a sum of 250 francs per kilo gram (equal to us $ 20 per kilo) unless the rfa (os) 18/2007 page ..... decision in trans mediterranean airways vs m/s. universal exports & anr. (2011)10 scc 31.as balanc(ing) the imposition of a presumption of liability on the carrier by limiting his liability ... the (former) house of lords had, in abnett v. british airways plc. 1997 (1) all.er 193.similarly characterized identical terms of uk ..... part of registered baggage or cargo, or of any object contained therein, the weight to be taken into consideration in determining the amount to which the carrier s liability is limited shall be only the total weight of the package or packages concerned. nevertheless, when the loss, damage or delay of a part of ..... sum is greater than the actual value to the consignor at delivery. (3) as regards objects of which the passenger takes charge himself the liability of the carrier is limited to 5,000 francs per passenger. (4) the sums mentioned in this rule shall be deemed to refer to the french franc consisting ..... of bombay air 195.sc 459.jumma masjid v kodimaniandra air 196.sc 847). the rule was explained crisply in suthendran v. immigration appeal tribunal, (1976) 3 all er 61.(hl) as follows:"parliament is prima facie to be credited with meaning what is said in an .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 28 2007

Kola (FC) and Another (FC) (Appellants) Vs. Secretary of State for Wor ...

  • Decided on : 28-Nov-2007

Court : House of Lords

..... to ensure that those intent on claiming asylum are not penalised for using false documents or clandestine methods of entry to overcome the increasingly obstructive effect of visa controls and carriers liability. all this is described in adimis case [2001] qb 667. 43. as already explained, the court of appeal in qs case [2004] qb 36 took account of adimi ..... that the case was only of historic interest and that the law had since been changed at least twice (a reference plainly to the immigration and asylum act 1999 (the 1999 act) and the nationality immigration and asylum act 2002 (the 2002 act)). 23. kennedy lj (giving the only reasoned judgment in the court of appeal in the present case) at para 8, cited the above ..... benefits accessed through income support. 7. the governments response to jcwi was that the identical regime should indeed be re-enacted by primary legislation, the asylum and immigration act 1996. the 1996 act made only two concessions: one was to continue any benefit entitlement up to the determination of the appeal process; the other was to confer on ultimately successful asylum seekers ..... ). the court of appeal held the 1996 regulations to be of such draconian effect as to conflict with certain statutory rights previously conferred upon asylum seekers by the asylum and immigration appeals act 1993: a significant number of asylum seekers would either be driven by penury to forfeit their claims or be forced into utter destitution. the court concluded that only .....

Tag this Judgment!
Feb 24 1913

Southern Pacific Co. v. Schuyler

  • Decided on : 24-Feb-1913

Court : US Supreme Court

..... upon two independent grounds, the second ground being avowedly based upon the hypothesis that the court might be wrong in its decision upon the first. whether the hepburn act prohibits a carrier from giving free interstate transportation to the employees of the railway mail service when they are not on duty, but are traveling for their own benefit or pleasure, ..... 1913 decided february 24, 1913 227 u.s. 601 error to the supreme court of the state of utah syllabus whether the anti-pass provision of the hepburn act prohibits a carrier from giving free interstate transportation to employees of the railway mail service when not on duty but traveling for their own benefit is a federal question. one holding a ..... for the safety of passengers. 37 utah 581 affirmed. the facts, which involve the liability of an interstate railway carrier for personal injuries sustained through its negligence by a railway mail service clerk traveling without payment of fare, and the construction of the anti-pass provisions of the hepburn act, are stated in the opinion. page 227 u. s. 605 mr. justice ..... stat. 584, 585, c. 3591), which forbids common carriers subject to the provisions of the act, after january 1, 1907, to "directly or indirectly issue or give any interstate free ticket, free pass, or free transportation for passengers, except . . . to railway mail service employees, post office inspectors, customs inspectors, and immigration inspectors; . . . and any person, other than the persons excepted in .....

Tag this Judgment!
May 08 1964

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Mayer Hans George

  • Decided on : 08-May-1964

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1965)67BOMLR583

..... it is absolutely clear that the implementation of the object of a statute would otherwise be defeated and its exclusion enables those put under strict liability by their act or omission to assist the promotion of the law. the nature of mens rea that will be implied in a statute creating an offence ..... rejected it. i have already dealt with this decision in another context. there the minister under the powers (conferred on him, by section 9 of the immigration ordinance, 1952, issued an order prohibiting the appellant therein from entering singapore, he was prosecuted for disobeying that order. section 9, in the case of ..... transit manifest for cargo, as explained by the high court, is twofold, namely, 'to keep a record of goods delivered into the custody of the carrier for safe carriage and to enable the customs authorities to check and verify the dutiable goods which arrive by a particular night,' 'cargo' is a shipload ..... part a entitled 'carriage of passengers and baggage' by its article 8, para. 1(c) excludes goods which are merchandise from the obligation of carriers to transport as luggage or as baggage, while article 3 of part b dealing with carriage of goods provides that gold is accepted for carriage only ..... that what a passenger carried with himself or on his person could not be 'cargo', and that cargo was that which was handed over to the carrier for carriage. reliance was, in this connection placed on the definition of the term 'cargo' in dictionaries where it is said to mean 'the .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 24 1964

State of Maharashtra Vs. Hans George

  • Decided on : 24-Aug-1964

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1965SC722; [1965]35CompCas557(SC); [1965]1SCR123

..... a statute only where it is absolutely clear that the implementation of the object of a statute would otherwise be defeated and its exclusion enables those put under strict liability by their act or omission to assist the promotion of the law. the nature of mens rea that will be implied in a statute creating an offence depends upon the object of ..... our opinion, be accepted. in the first place, the order of the minister dealt with by the privy council was never 'published' since admittedly it was transmitted only to the immigration official who kept it with himself. but in the case on hand, the notification by the reserve bank varying the scope of the exemption, was admittedly 'published' in the official ..... to be made being that what a passenger carried with himself or on his person could not be 'cargo', and that cargo was that which was handed over to the carrier for carriage. reliance was, in this connection placed on the definition of the term 'cargo' in dictionaries where it is said to mean 'the merchandise or wares contained or conveyed ..... . the object of maintaining a transit manifest for cargo, as explained by the high court, is twofold, namely, 'to keep a record of goods delivered into the custody of the carrier for safe carriage and to enable the customs authorities to check and verify the dutiable goods which arrive by a particular flight'. 'cargo' is a shipload or the landing of .....

Tag this Judgment!
Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //