Kamoka & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2016] EWHC 769 (QB) (15 April 2016)

Kamoka & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2016] EWHC 769 (QB) (15 April 2016)

The claims, insofar as they arise from Control Order proceedings or SIAC proceedings, represent a collateral challenge to final decisions of courts of competent jurisdiction and thus constitute an abuse of process. There was no suppression of evidence or breach of duty of candour by the Defendants. The Claimants had as full an opportunity as possible to contest the decisions, given the constraints of national security and statutory regimes. Further prosecution of these claims is an abuse of process, except that C1, C3, and C4 are permitted a short period to attempt to distinguish their positions if they wish.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 769 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Ismail Kamoka; Claimant: Ziad Ali Hashem; Claimant: Abdel Nasser Bourouag; Claimant: Khaled Abusalama Al Allaqi; Claimant: Alia Bibi Hassan (Administratrix for the Estate of Faraj Hassan Al-Saadi); Defendant: The Security Service; Defendant: The Secret Intelligence Service; Defendant: The Attorney General; Defendant: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Defendant: The Home Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out Claims as Abuse of Process
Outcome
Claims arising from Control Order proceedings and SIAC proceedings struck out as abuse of process, except C1, C3, and C4 may seek to distinguish their positions within a short period.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Disclosure, Special Advocates, Control Orders, Deportation, False Imprisonment, Misfeasance in Public Office
Public Law National Security Human Rights Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Disclosure Special Advocates Control Orders +3 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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ismail Kamoka

Claimant

Ziad Ali Hashem

Claimant

Abdel Nasser Bourouag

Claimant

Khaled Abusalama Al Allaqi

Claimant

Alia Bibi Hassan (Administratrix for the Estate of Faraj Hassan Al-Saadi)

Claimant

The Security Service

Defendant

The Secret Intelligence Service

Defendant

The Attorney General

Defendant

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Defendant

The Home Office

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out Claims as Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims constitute an abuse of process under Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police
  2. 2 Whether there was suppression of evidence or breach of duty of candour by the Defendants
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings before SIAC and the High Court were tainted by non-disclosure or reliance on detainee evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claims, insofar as they arise from Control Order proceedings or SIAC proceedings, represent a collateral challenge to final decisions of courts of competent jurisdiction and thus constitute an abuse of process. There was no suppression of evidence or breach of duty of candour by the Defendants. The Claimants had as full an opportunity as possible to contest the decisions, given the constraints of national security and statutory regimes. Further prosecution of these claims is an abuse of process, except that C1, C3, and C4 are permitted a short period to attempt to distinguish their positions if they wish.

Court Disposition

Claims arising from Control Order proceedings and SIAC proceedings struck out as abuse of process, except C1, C3, and C4 may seek to distinguish their positions within a short period.

Orders

  • All claims for C2 and C5 struck out.
  • All claims relating to Control Orders struck out.