AM, R (on the application of) v Sheffield City Council

24 October 2024

[2024] EWHC 2670 (Admin)

High Court

A young man from Afghanistan challenged the UK council's decision that he was an adult, not a child, based on a quick assessment. The judge sided with the council, saying the assessment was fair, even if not very detailed, and there wasn't enough evidence to prove the man was younger than they thought.

Key Facts

•Claimant, an Afghan national, claims a date of birth of 03 May 2006.
•Home Office assessed him as an adult (DOB 3 May 1998) upon arrival in the UK on 21 August 2023.
•Sheffield City Council conducted a brief age assessment on 30 August 2023, concluding the claimant was over 25.
•The assessment relied on physical appearance (shaved face, facial hair, acne scarring, adult demeanour).
•Claimant challenges the assessment's procedural fairness and the council's age assessment process.
•Claimant sought judicial review, a quashing order, a mandatory order for a full assessment, and a declaration of his correct DOB.

Legal Principles

Two elements to age assessment challenges: traditional judicial review grounds and the factual issue of age.

R (on the application of Pishtian Karimi) v Sheffield City Council [2024] EWHC 93 (Admin)

Judicial review permission will be refused unless there's an arguable ground with a realistic prospect of success.

The Administrative Court, Judicial Review Guide 2024

For the objective question of age, the court asks if the material raises a factual case that couldn't properly succeed in a contested hearing.

R (FZ) v Croydon LBC [2011] EWCA Civ 59

In age assessment challenges, the court considers whether reasons are sufficient for the claimant to understand the conclusion reached.

South Bucks District Council v Porter [2004] 1 WLR 1953 and AS v Croydon [2011] EWHC 2091 (Admin)

Outcomes

Permission to apply for judicial review refused.

The court found no arguable grounds with a realistic prospect of success. The claimant failed to demonstrate procedural unfairness or that the age assessment was factually incorrect.

Interim relief (accommodation) refused.

The claimant was now over 18, and the grounds for interim relief no longer existed.

AM, R (on the application of) v Sheffield City Council

Key Facts

Legal Principles

Outcomes

Similar Cases

SH, R (on the application of) v Sheffield City Council

OAM, R (on application of) v Sheffield City Council

KRA, R (on the application of) v Cheshire East Council

ZHB, R (on the application of) v The City and County of Cardiff Council

LS, R (on the application of) v Warrington Borough Council