AM & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 219 (17 March 2009)

AM & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 219 (17 March 2009)

The state's obligation under Article 3 ECHR to conduct an effective, independent investigation was engaged by the credible allegations of inhuman or degrading treatment at Harmondsworth. The combination of the Whalley inquiry, police investigation, and civil proceedings did not satisfy the Article 3 procedural obligation, as they lacked independence, sufficient remit, and did not address systemic issues. However, given the passage of time and missed opportunities for an effective inquiry, the appropriate relief was a declaration of breach, not a mandatory order for a public inquiry.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 219
Parties
Appellant: AM & Others; 1st Respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department; 2nd Respondent: Kalyx Limited; Intervener: Bail for Immigration Detainees
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court (administrative Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; declaration granted; no mandatory order for inquiry
Legal Topics
Article 3 ECHR, State Investigative Obligation, Immigration Detention, Judicial Review, Procedural Obligations Under ECHR
Human Rights Law Public Law Administrative Law Article 3 ECHR State Investigative Obligation Immigration Detention Judicial Review Procedural Obligations Under ECHR

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AM & Others

Appellant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

1st Respondent

Kalyx Limited

2nd Respondent

Bail for Immigration Detainees

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court (administrative Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the state's investigative obligation under Article 3 ECHR was engaged by the treatment of detainees at Harmondsworth Immigration Detention Centre in November 2006
  2. 2 Whether the state's investigative obligation was discharged by existing inquiries, criminal or civil proceedings, or required an independent public inquiry
  3. 3 Whether the timing of the complaint precluded effective relief

Ratio Decidendi

The state's obligation under Article 3 ECHR to conduct an effective, independent investigation was engaged by the credible allegations of inhuman or degrading treatment at Harmondsworth. The combination of the Whalley inquiry, police investigation, and civil proceedings did not satisfy the Article 3 procedural obligation, as they lacked independence, sufficient remit, and did not address systemic issues. However, given the passage of time and missed opportunities for an effective inquiry, the appropriate relief was a declaration of breach, not a mandatory order for a public inquiry.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; declaration granted; no mandatory order for inquiry

Orders

  • Declaration that the Home Secretary failed to meet the United Kingdom's obligation under Article 3 ECHR to institute an independent inquiry into the Harmondsworth disturbance
  • No mandatory order for a public inquiry