SS, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2017] EWHC 1295 (Admin) (26 May 2017)

SS, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2017] EWHC 1295 (Admin) (26 May 2017)

The claimant's detention was unlawful because it was for the purpose of securing transfer under Dublin III, and Article 28 of that Regulation applied. At the relevant time, there were no objective criteria defined by law for establishing a significant risk of absconding, as required by Article 28(2) and interpreted by the CJEU in Al Chodor. Therefore, the detention was contrary to EU law and unlawful. The age assessments by Oxfordshire County Council were not found to be manifestly erroneous or procedurally unfair on the evidence before the court.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1295 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: SS; First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Second Defendant: Oxfordshire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claimant succeeds in establishing that his detention was unlawful in principle under Article 28 of Dublin III.
Legal Topics
Unlawful Detention, Age Assessment, Dublin III Regulation, Asylum Procedure, Direct Effect of EU Law, Judicial Review Standards
Immigration Law Administrative Law European Union Law Human Rights Law Unlawful Detention Age Assessment Dublin III Regulation Asylum Procedure +2 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SS

Claimant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

First Defendant

Oxfordshire County Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's detention was unlawful under Article 28 of Dublin III Regulation
  2. 2 Whether Article 28 of Dublin III has direct effect and imposes enforceable limitations on detention under domestic law
  3. 3 Whether the age assessments by Oxfordshire County Council were lawful and procedurally fair

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's detention was unlawful because it was for the purpose of securing transfer under Dublin III, and Article 28 of that Regulation applied. At the relevant time, there were no objective criteria defined by law for establishing a significant risk of absconding, as required by Article 28(2) and interpreted by the CJEU in Al Chodor. Therefore, the detention was contrary to EU law and unlawful. The age assessments by Oxfordshire County Council were not found to be manifestly erroneous or procedurally unfair on the evidence before the court.

Court Disposition

Claimant succeeds in establishing that his detention was unlawful in principle under Article 28 of Dublin III.

Orders

  • Declaration that the claimant's detention was unlawful under Article 28 of Dublin III.
  • Permission to amend grounds to rely on Article 28 granted.