CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 mars 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt }   Published on 6 April 2021   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 35194/20 M.A. against the United Kingdom lodged on 13 August 2020 communicated on 17 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE Invoking Article 8 of the Convention, the application challenges a decision to deport him to Pakistan. The applicant was convicted of manslaughter in 2006 and sentenced to four years’ imprisonment. He was subsequently issued with a notice of intention to deport, against which he successfully appealed on Article 8 grounds. The deportation order was revoked and he was thereafter granted successive six-month periods of Discretionary Leave to Remain in the United Kingdom. He did not reoffend, but in 2016 a decision was taken to deport him pursuant to paragraph 399C of the Immigration Rules HC 395 (as amended). An appeal against this decision was unsuccessful, with the First Tier Tribunal finding that there were no “very compelling circumstances”, over and above those in section   117C of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (as amended) and paragraph 399 of the Immigration Rules HC 395 (as amended) (see   Unuane v. the United Kingdom , no . 80343/17, 24 November 2020) which outweigh the public interest in his deportation.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Having regard to the Court’s case-law (see, for example, Boultif v.   Switzerland , no. 54273/00, ECHR 2001 ‑ IX; Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 46410/99, ECHR 2006 ‑ XII; and A.A. v. the United Kingdom , no.   8000/08, 20 September 2011), would the applicant’s deportation to Pakistan constitute a disproportionate interference with the right to respect for his family life enshrined in Article 8 of the Convention?