AOJ, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Islington

28 February 2024

[2024] EWHC 427 (Admin)

High Court

A refugee challenged a council's decision not to assess his need for special education because the council thought he was too old. The court said the case was pointless because the refugee moved away, so they didn't decide whether the council was right or wrong about his age.

Key Facts

•AOJ, an Afghan refugee claiming to be a child, challenged Islington Council's refusal to conduct an EHC needs assessment.
•The Council, relying on a previous assessment deeming AOJ an adult (at least 28 years old), refused the assessment.
•AOJ argued the Council unlawfully failed to conduct a proper age inquiry before dismissing the request.
•AOJ later moved out of Islington's jurisdiction to Birmingham.
•The court considered whether the claim was academic given AOJ's relocation.

Legal Principles

Duty to undertake reasonable inquiries (Tameside duty)

Secretary of State for Education and Science v Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council [1977] AC 1014

Duty to act in a procedurally fair manner

Various case law on age assessments under the 1989 Act

Age determination as precedent fact (for 1989 Act, potentially 2014 Act)

R (A) v Croydon London Borough Council [2009] UKSC 8

Merton-compliant age assessment is not a rigid prescription but depends on circumstances

R (HAM) v Brent London Borough Council [2022] EWHC 1924

Assessing age based solely on physical appearance permissible only in obvious cases

R (B) v Merton London Borough Council [2003] EWHC 1689

Academic claims should not be heard unless there's a good reason

R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Salem [1999] 1 AC 450

Outcomes

Claim dismissed as academic

AOJ's relocation and lack of intention to return to Islington rendered the claim moot; any future dispute would be with Birmingham, not Islington.

Court declined to exercise discretion to hear the claim despite potential general importance.

The issue of applying the 1989 Act age assessment approach to the 2014 Act hadn't arisen in other cases, and the required assessment was fact-specific, making a broader ruling difficult.

AOJ, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Islington

Key Facts

Legal Principles

Outcomes

Similar Cases

HP, R (on the application of) v The Mayor and Burgesses of the Royal Borough of Greenwich

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

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

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

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