Samer Alabboud Alhasan, R (on the application of) v The Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor

Samer Alabboud Alhasan, R (on the application of) v The Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor

The exclusion of legal aid for asylum interviews for claimants who made a child-claim but turned 18 before the interview is not discriminatory under Article 14 ECHR, as the differential treatment is objectively justified and not manifestly without reasonable foundation. The Lord Chancellor's rule-making is lawful. The Director's refusal of Exceptional Case Funding was lawful and reasonable, as the claimant could participate effectively in the process with existing safeguards.

Parties
Claimant: Samer Alabboud Alhasan; First Defendant: Director of Legal Aid Casework; Second Defendant: Lord Chancellor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Legal Aid, Asylum, Discrimination, Judicial Review, Children's Rights
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Immigration Law Legal Aid Asylum Discrimination Judicial Review Children's Rights

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samer Alabboud Alhasan

Claimant

Director of Legal Aid Casework

First Defendant

Lord Chancellor

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exclusion of legal aid for asylum interviews for claimants who made a child-claim but turned 18 before the interview is discriminatory under Article 14 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Chancellor's rule-making under the 2012 Regulations is objectively justified
  3. 3 Whether the Director's refusal of Exceptional Case Funding was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The exclusion of legal aid for asylum interviews for claimants who made a child-claim but turned 18 before the interview is not discriminatory under Article 14 ECHR, as the differential treatment is objectively justified and not manifestly without reasonable foundation. The Lord Chancellor's rule-making is lawful. The Director's refusal of Exceptional Case Funding was lawful and reasonable, as the claimant could participate effectively in the process with existing safeguards.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim against each Defendant is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs as between the Claimant and the Director.