Alhasan, R (On the Application Of) v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor [2024] EWHC 2031 (Admin) (21 August 2024)

Alhasan, R (On the Application Of) v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor [2024] EWHC 2031 (Admin) (21 August 2024)

The exclusion of legal aid for attendance at asylum interviews for claimants who made their claim as a child but turned 18 before the interview is unlawful. The regulation discriminates against a vulnerable group without objective or reasonable justification, is disproportionate, and fails to align with the Home Office's own policy and the immigration rules, which recognise the ongoing vulnerabilities of such individuals. The bright line of age 18 at the date of interview is not justified in this context. The refusal of Exceptional Case Funding was also unlawful.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2031 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Samer Alabboud Alhasan; First Defendant: The Director of Legal Aid Casework; Second Defendant: The Lord Chancellor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Legal Aid, Asylum Procedure, Discrimination, Children's Rights, Judicial Review, Article 14 ECHR
Public Law Human Rights Law Immigration Law Legal Aid Asylum Procedure Discrimination Children's Rights 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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samer Alabboud Alhasan

Claimant

The Director of Legal Aid Casework

First Defendant

The Lord Chancellor

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exclusion of legal aid for asylum interviews for claimants who made their claim as a child but turned 18 before the interview is unlawful under Article 14 ECHR and/or common law standards of reasonableness.
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Chancellor's regulation 3 of the 2012 Regulations unlawfully discriminates against 'aged out' child asylum claimants.
  3. 3 Whether the refusal of Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) was lawful.

Ratio Decidendi

The exclusion of legal aid for attendance at asylum interviews for claimants who made their claim as a child but turned 18 before the interview is unlawful. The regulation discriminates against a vulnerable group without objective or reasonable justification, is disproportionate, and fails to align with the Home Office's own policy and the immigration rules, which recognise the ongoing vulnerabilities of such individuals. The bright line of age 18 at the date of interview is not justified in this context. The refusal of Exceptional Case Funding was also unlawful.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that regulation 3 of the Civil Legal Aid (Immigration Interviews) (Exceptions) Regulations 2012 is unlawful insofar as it excludes legal aid for attendance at asylum interviews for claimants who made their claim as a child but turned 18 before the interview.
  • Quashing of the Director's refusal of Exceptional Case Funding.