MM, R (on the application) v Secretary of State for Home Department

MM, R (on the application) v Secretary of State for Home Department

There has been no significant change of circumstances since the interim relief order was made. The council remains bound by the order and must identify accommodation to enable a bail application. The balance of convenience has not shifted to justify discharging the order.

Parties
Claimant: MM (by his litigation friend Cathrin Istifanous); First Defendant: Secretary of State for Home Department; Second Defendant: London Borough of Hillingdon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Enforcement and Discharge of Interim Relief Order
Outcome
Claimant's application to enforce the interim relief order is granted; council's application to discharge the order is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interim Relief, Care Act 2014, Mandatory Injunction, Balance of Convenience, Judicial Review, Accommodation for Vulnerable Persons
Public Law Administrative Law Social Welfare Law Interim Relief Care Act 2014 Mandatory Injunction Balance of Convenience Judicial Review +1 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MM (by his litigation friend Cathrin Istifanous)

Claimant

Secretary of State for Home Department

First Defendant

London Borough of Hillingdon

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Enforcement and Discharge of Interim Relief Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interim relief order should be enforced or discharged
  2. 2 Whether there has been a significant change of circumstances since the interim relief order
  3. 3 Whether the council failed to carry out a lawful assessment under the Care Act 2014

Ratio Decidendi

There has been no significant change of circumstances since the interim relief order was made. The council remains bound by the order and must identify accommodation to enable a bail application. The balance of convenience has not shifted to justify discharging the order.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application to enforce the interim relief order is granted; council's application to discharge the order is dismissed.

Orders

  • Council to identify and secure accommodation for the Claimant within 21 days to enable a bail application.
  • Costs of both applications to be paid by the Second Defendant to the Claimant and First Defendant.