Emma Daykin


Year of Call: 2005

Practice Group(s): Immigration, Public & Regulatory

Portrait of Emma Daykin

Practice Profile:

What the directories say

"She is an excellent advocate with impressive drafting skills" Legal 500 2019.

Emma has been listed as a leading junior in the Legal 500 for the last three years.

Practice summary

Emma has always practised in immigration, asylum and human rights but in recent years she has become the expert and led the way in conceiving major strategic judicial review challenges to primary and secondary legislation particularly involving the Ankara Agreement for Turkish businesspersons. She is a very effective junior at all levels either appearing in her own right or led by Queen's Counsel.

Emma is increasingly instructed on a public access basis, particularly at the initial stages for strategic advice. Clients are able to capitalise on Emma’s vast appellate experience at the application stage when the solution to a problem is less than obvious in order to put forward strong applications, which are prepared with future litigation in mind, often resulting in positive results without the need for further litigation.

Emma acts as an advocate and advises in all aspects of immigration, asylum and human rights, at all levels. She has particular experience in complex trafficking claims, deprivation of nationality, asylum claims based on sexual identity, the Turkish Ankara Agreement and appeals against deportation. She also regularly advises and acts in judicial review matters (including urgent applications and injunctions), civil penalties for immigration offences and civil claims for damages for unlawful detention.

Before focusing her practice towards purely immigration, asylum and human rights, Emma also maintained a successful criminal defence practice. Her experience as a criminal advocate has proved particularly valuable when instructed in deportation matters and cases requiring cross-examination of witnesses relied upon by the Secretary of State.

Notable Cases:

Notable/Reported Cases: Asylum/Immigration

ST Eritrea, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] UKSC 12 (21 March 2012), [2012] 2 WLR 735, [2012] 2 AC 135, [2012] 3 All ER 1037, [2012] INLR 440, [2012] UKSC 12, [2012] Imm AR 734, instructed as second junior counsel representing the Appellant. The appeal challenged the proposed expulsion of an Eritrean refugee to Ethiopia on the basis that it is contrary to article 32 of Geneva Convention. The judgment of Lord Hope (at paragraphs 45-47) makes an important reference to article 27(1) of Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status, regarding the full panoply of rights that the person seeking asylum must be afforded when a member state is seeking to remove the individual to a safe third country.

SSHD v CA (Turkey) [2018] EWCA Civ 2875, instructed as junior counsel for the claimant resisting the appeal by SSHD in Court of Appeal of successful judicial review which challenged the amendment to primary legislation removing the right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal for Turkish nationals claiming rights under the Ankara Agreement as incompatible with Art. 41 (1) of the Additional Protocol of the Ankara Agreement. Major strategic challenge conceived by Emma who is also instructed in a number of cases stayed behind Akturk, which have subsequently been amended in light of the Court of Appeal decision to rely on the Principle of Effectiveness in EU law. Led by Nathalie Lieven QC.

R (Alliance of Turkish Businesspeople Ltd) v SSHD [2019] EWHC 603 (Admin), a challenge to the change in policy and immigration rules of the requirements for Turkish businesspeople to settle in the United Kingdom on the basis that those already within the scheme had a legitimate expectation they would continue to subject to the 1973 Rules through to settlement. It was accepted that the claimant had a legitimate expectation and they relied upon it to their detriment but ultimately the frustration of their legitimate expectation was a proportionate response in the public interest. The claimant is seeking to appeal the decision. Emma appeared for the claimant led by Sarah Ford QC.

R (otao Akturk) v SSHD [2017] WLR (D) 145; [2017] EWHC 297 (Admin), in the Administrative Court, Holman J held, in the lead case on this issue, that the abolition of the right of appeal for Turkish citizens seeking to exercise their freedom of establishment under the European Community Association Agreement (the Ankara Agreement) with Turkey is incompatible with the Agreement in that it breaches Article 41 (1) of the Additional Protocol (standstill clause) and that incompatibility is not avoided by Administrative Review. The individual decisions were also quashed on traditional public law grounds. Emma appeared for the Claimant led by Nathalie Lieven QC.

Dang (Refugee - query revocation - Article 3) [2013] UKUT 00043 (IAC), confirms that a decision to revoke refugee status only relates to an individual's status under the Qualification Directive and not their status under the Refugee Convention. If an individual was granted refugee status some time ago, there is no legal or evidential presumption that, for so long as he is a refugee under the Refugee Convention, removal would be in breach of Article 3.

ST (Ethnic Eritrean - nationality - return) Ethiopia CG [2011] UKUT 00252 (IAC), appeared as junior counsel. This case stands as the current country guidance for Ethiopia, concerning deprivation of nationality amounting to persecution. The case involved lengthy and complex written and oral expert evidence regarding Ethiopian nationality law and the application in practice.

EK (Ankara Agreement - 1972 Rules - construction) Turkey [2010] UKUT 425 (IAC), [2011] Imm AR 212, Emma successfully defended the decision of the First Tier Tribunal, upon appeal by the SSHD before the Upper Tribunal, based on the construction of the 1972 Immigration Rules further to the Ankara Agreement.

MK (Albania) CG [2009] UKAIT 00036, appeared as junior counsel. The case involved the risks to lesbian women in Albania under the Refugee and Human Rights Conventions. The matter was both factually and legally complex.

Notable/Reported Cases: Criminal Defence

R v Hopes (Nichola Jane) [2011] EWCA Crim 1869, appeal against conviction for burglary.

L v CPS [2010] EWHC 341 Admin (February 10 2010); [2010] All ER (D) 128 (Feb); (2010) 174 JP 209, appeal against conviction of being in charge of a dog dangerously out of control (s.3 Dangerous Dogs Act 1991) by way of case stated, on the basis that it was an error of law to find that two people can simultaneously be in charge of a dog, when physical control had transferred from one person to another.

Further Professional Information:

Death Penalty

Emma remains absolutely committed to representing those facing the death penalty through her involvement with the charity Amicus. Emma's devotion to this work began in 2004 when she worked as an investigator with the Office of Capital Defense Counsel, in Jackson, Mississippi on numerous capital murder cases and returning for a brief period in 2007 and Missouri in 2015. Emma regularly assists with training and selecting future interns.

Criminal Bar Association
South Eastern Circuit


The Law and Practice of Expulsion and Exclusion from the United Kingdom: Deportation, Removal, Exclusion and Deprivation of Citizenship (Contributor) published on 11 December 2014 by Hart Publishing, Oxford.