Kamoka & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2015] EWHC 60 (QB) (22 January 2015)

Kamoka & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2015] EWHC 60 (QB) (22 January 2015)

Statutory regimes do not constitute an absolute bar to private law actions or judicial review claims in all circumstances; claims may proceed where statutory language is not sufficiently clear to oust common law remedies, but abuse of process principles require careful scrutiny to avoid impermissible collateral attack on prior decisions; fresh evidence may justify claims if not previously considered.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 60
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); Claimant: Mahmud Mohamed Abushima; Claimant: Abdullah Bakr Hassan; Claimant: Salah Mohammed; Claimant: Abdulbaqi Khaled; Claimant: Abdulbasit Abdulrahim; 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
22 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim and Judicial Review / Application to Strike Out And/or Dismiss Claims; Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
Application to strike out/dismiss not granted in absolute terms; claims not barred as a matter of law; further scrutiny required for abuse of process and factual overlap.
Legal Topics
False Imprisonment, Misfeasance in Public Office, Control Orders, SIAC Appeals, Asset Freezing, Disclosure Obligations, Abuse of Process, Statutory Bar, Judicial Review
Public Law Human Rights National Security Immigration Administrative Law Tort Law False Imprisonment Misfeasance in Public Office +7 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 5 Authorities cited 32 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

Mahmud Mohamed Abushima

Claimant

Abdullah Bakr Hassan

Claimant

Salah Mohammed

Claimant

Abdulbaqi Khaled

Claimant

Abdulbasit Abdulrahim

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 Claim and Judicial Review / Application to Strike Out And/or Dismiss Claims; Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statutory regimes (SIAC Act 1997, Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005) bar private law claims and judicial review
  2. 2 Whether alleged failures of disclosure and candour by defendants vitiate prior decisions
  3. 3 Whether claims amount to abuse of process or impermissible collateral attack on prior decisions

Ratio Decidendi

Statutory regimes do not constitute an absolute bar to private law actions or judicial review claims in all circumstances; claims may proceed where statutory language is not sufficiently clear to oust common law remedies, but abuse of process principles require careful scrutiny to avoid impermissible collateral attack on prior decisions; fresh evidence may justify claims if not previously considered.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out/dismiss not granted in absolute terms; claims not barred as a matter of law; further scrutiny required for abuse of process and factual overlap.

Orders

  • Claims may proceed subject to further consideration of abuse of process and factual overlap; no absolute statutory bar found; no final determination on merits or damages.