... obligations or if the UK withdrew from those treaties. The significance of the issue is that a state is bound by a norm of CIL in the absence of treaty obligations. It is not inconceivable that we, or some other national court, could at some point be called upon to determine that question.”

On whether non-refoulement is rule of CIL, and UKSC's consideration in Rwanda case:

“In the context of that appeal, we did not have to determine whether the principle amounts to a rule of customary international law.. It would have been highly relevant if there were not a number of binding treaty..

Thank you, it's been a long old slog!

… have to depend on submissions by advocates nor should it have to piece together a number of different documents in order to understand what happened.”

"[89]: In the present case we consider that this approach to interpretation... calls for consideration and protection of E3’s individual rights according to the principle of legality and under the Statelessness Convention... in so far as that does not compromise the statutory purpose."

"[88]: The legal effect of a failure to comply with a condition for the exercise of a power conferred by a statute, where that is not spelled out expressly, depends upon an inference as to Parliament’s intention as to what that effect should be..."