AS (Lebanon), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor

AS (Lebanon), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor

The claimant has a good arguable case that his continued detention is unlawful due to his psychiatric condition and the failure to properly apply policy and consider medical evidence. However, at this interlocutory stage, the court declines to order interim release or transfer, as the threshold for mandatory orders against Ministers is not met and the risk to the public is too great.

Parties
Claimant: AS (Lebanon); First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice; Interested Party: Brent Primary Care Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission and Interim Relief Application; Case Management Directions
Outcome
Permission granted; interim relief refused; case expedited for hearing.
Legal Topics
Immigration Detention, Judicial Review, Mental Health and Detention, Article 3 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Policy on Detention of Mentally Ill Persons
Immigration Law Mental Health Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Immigration Detention Judicial Review Mental Health and Detention Article 3 ECHR +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AS (Lebanon)

Claimant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

First Defendant

Secretary of State for Justice

Second Defendant

Brent Primary Care Trust

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission and Interim Relief Application; Case Management Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's continued immigration detention is lawful given his mental health condition
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State lawfully applied policy on detention of the mentally ill
  3. 3 Whether the policy itself is lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant has a good arguable case that his continued detention is unlawful due to his psychiatric condition and the failure to properly apply policy and consider medical evidence. However, at this interlocutory stage, the court declines to order interim release or transfer, as the threshold for mandatory orders against Ministers is not met and the risk to the public is too great.

Court Disposition

Permission granted; interim relief refused; case expedited for hearing.

Orders

  • Secretary of State for Justice joined as Second Defendant; Brent Primary Care Trust joined as Interested Party.
  • Permission granted against both Defendants.