The claimant was convicted in February 2009 of attempting to contaminate goods offered for sale to the public for which he was sentenced to a total of nine years imprisonment. The claimant submitted that his fifty-four month detention far exceeds what is a reasonable period to effect his deportation. Held: there was a realistic prospect of the claimant’s deportation, and, accordingly there has not been a breach of the second and third Hardial Singh principles. Although the resolution of the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal has taken longer than the defendant clearly anticipated at the hearing before on 14 October 2016, and subsequently at the hearing on 1 March 2017, the court was not satisfied that the defendant has failed to act without reasonable diligence. Accordingly, the fourth Hardial Singh principle has not been breached.
Nick Armstrong was involved in this case.
 EWHC 1463 (Admin)https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/asd-v-sshd-2017-ewhc-1463-admin/