AT (Guinea)), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2019] EWHC 2709 (Admin) (22 October 2019)

AT (Guinea)), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2019] EWHC 2709 (Admin) (22 October 2019)

The Claimant's detention was lawful at all relevant times as there was a realistic prospect of removal, the risk of absconding and re-offending justified continued detention, and the Secretary of State acted with reasonable diligence. The Claimant was not eligible for s.4, s.95, or Schedule 10 accommodation or support during the relevant period, and the First-tier Tribunal lawfully dismissed his appeal against refusal of s.95 support.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2709 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: AT (Guinea); First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Second Defendant: First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber, Asylum Support)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Immigration Detention, Asylum Support, Deportation, Judicial Review, Unlawful Detention, Hardial Singh Principles, Article 5 ECHR
Immigration Law Public Law Human Rights Immigration Detention Asylum Support Deportation Judicial Review Unlawful Detention +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AT (Guinea)

Claimant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

First Defendant

First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber, Asylum Support)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant's immigration detention was unlawful under the Hardial Singh principles
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State lawfully processed applications for accommodation and asylum support under ss.4 and 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and Schedule 10 of the Immigration Act 2016
  3. 3 Whether the Secretary of State failed to make a decision on the application for Schedule 10 accommodation

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant's detention was lawful at all relevant times as there was a realistic prospect of removal, the risk of absconding and re-offending justified continued detention, and the Secretary of State acted with reasonable diligence. The Claimant was not eligible for s.4, s.95, or Schedule 10 accommodation or support during the relevant period, and the First-tier Tribunal lawfully dismissed his appeal against refusal of s.95 support.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Judicial review refused on all grounds
  • Renewed applications for permission on grounds 2 to 4 dismissed