Refugee and Migrant Forum of Essex and London & Anor v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Refugee and Migrant Forum of Essex and London & Anor v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

The appeal was allowed because the claimants failed to identify the specific decision by the Secretary of State that attracted the section 55 duty, resulting in prejudice to the Secretary of State and rendering the relief granted by the High Court inappropriate; the declaration unlawfully mandated a substantive outcome rather than addressing the process duty under section 55.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Refugee and Migrant Forum of Essex and London; Claimant/respondent: Cecilia Adjei; Appellant/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed on ground 2; High Court's declaration set aside.
Legal Topics
Section 55 Borders Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009, Judicial Review Pleading Requirements, Digital Immigration Status Documentation, Section 3 C Leave, Relief and Discretion Under Senior Courts Act 1981
Administrative Law Immigration Law Children's Rights Section 55 Borders Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 Judicial Review Pleading Requirements Digital Immigration Status Documentation Section 3 C Leave Relief and Discretion Under Senior Courts Act 1981

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Refugee and Migrant Forum of Essex and London

Claimant/respondent

Cecilia Adjei

Claimant/respondent

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State failed to comply with section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 in the roll-out of digital status documentation to migrants on section 3C leave
  2. 2 Whether the claimants sufficiently pleaded the impugned decision attracting the section 55 duty
  3. 3 Whether relief should be granted where a section 55 breach would not have led to a different substantive outcome

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the claimants failed to identify the specific decision by the Secretary of State that attracted the section 55 duty, resulting in prejudice to the Secretary of State and rendering the relief granted by the High Court inappropriate; the declaration unlawfully mandated a substantive outcome rather than addressing the process duty under section 55.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed on ground 2; High Court's declaration set aside.

Orders

  • The declaration that the Secretary of State acted unlawfully in breach of section 55 is set aside.
  • No order requiring the Secretary of State to retake the decision or provide digital documentation to all those on section 3C leave.