Wilfred v HM Immigration Service [2002] EWCA Civ 1360 (10 September 2002)

Neutral Citation Number: [2002] EWCA Civ 1360 C1/2002/0354 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (Lord Justice Simon Brown) Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Tuesday, 10th September 2002 B e f o r e : LORD JUSTICE KAY ____________________ BODE WILFRED Claimant/Applicant -v- HM IMMIGRATION SERVICE Defendant/Respondent ____________________ (Computer Aided Transcript of the Palantype Notes of Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG Tel: 0170 421 4040 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court) ____________________ The Applicant did not appear and was unrepresented. The Respondent did not appear and was unrepresented. ____________________ HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT ____________________ Crown Copyright © Tuesday, 10th September 2002 LORD JUSTICE KAY: This is a renewed application for permission to appeal against a decision of Simon Brown LJ sitting in the Administrative Court when he refused the application by the applicant for judicial review. The matter has already been considered on the paper by Laws LJ who concluded: "In my judgment Simon Brown LJ was obviously right. I also consider that the applicant should have pursued his statutory remedy rather than sought judicial review." There is no attendance before me today. The applicant was originally represented by solicitors. Earlier this week they communicated with the court to say that they had received advice from counsel that the application was not capable of being argued, and they sought to be taken off the record as a result. By a letter bearing yesterday's date they indicated that they had made the applicant aware of today's hearing date and also made arrangements for him to have the necessary papers. He has not attended himself. Not only that, he has not communicated with the court in any way to suggest that he is in any sort of difficulties in keeping the appointment. Having had an opportunity to read the papers, this is, as Laws LJ made clear, an application which is wholly without merit. The decision of Simon Brown LJ is clearly right. That was a view reached by Laws LJ, reached by the applicant's own counsel and now reached equally by me. In those circumstances it can do nothing other than to delay the proper processes to adjourn this matter further. I refuse to do so. For exactly the same reasons as given question by Laws LJ, I refuse this application. Order: Application refused. BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII