Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Hawbir Muhammadi, R (on the application of) v Liverpool City Council

5 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 483 (Admin)
High Court
A young man from Iran challenged a decision saying he was an adult, not a child, when he arrived in the UK. A judge found there were problems with how the decision was made and sent the case to a special court to decide for sure if the man was a child when the original decision was made.

Key Facts

  • •Hawbir Muhamadi, an unaccompanied asylum-seeking young person from Iran, challenges Liverpool City Council's age assessment.
  • •The Home Office assessed his age as 18 (born 18 August 1999), while he claimed to be 17 (born 13 August 2005).
  • •Liverpool City Council's social workers conducted a brief age assessment, concluding he was 18.
  • •Permission for judicial review was initially refused, but the claimant renewed the application.
  • •The claim centers on alleged flaws in the age assessment process, including procedural unfairness, flawed credibility assessment, and excessive reliance on unreliable factors like appearance.
  • •The claimant's evidence included a witness statement and the record of answers given to social workers.
  • •The court considered whether the claim raised a factual case that could succeed at a contested hearing.
  • •Fresh evidence from subsequent assessments of the claimant was considered.

Legal Principles

In age assessment judicial reviews, the key question is whether, on the now available material, the individual was a child. The test is whether there is a factual case that could succeed at a contested hearing.

R (FZ) v Croydon LBC [2011] EWCA Civ 59 at §9; R (MVN) v Greenwich LBC [2015] EWHC 1942 (Admin) at §47; R (Karimi) v Sheffield City Council [2024] EWHC 93 (Admin) at §12

Standalone conventional judicial review grounds are subsumed in the objective age assessment but remain relevant in determining the weight to attach to the Local Authority's conclusion.

R (MVN) v Greenwich LBC [2015] EWHC 1942 (Admin) at §47, 48

Where documentary evidence of age is absent, the starting point is the credibility of the individual's own evidence, including consistency and explainable inconsistencies.

R (AE) v Croydon LBC [2012] EWCA Civ 547 at §44; R (MVN) v Greenwich LBC [2015] EWHC 1942 (Admin) at §25, 48

A proper 'minded to' procedure requires identifying concerns, giving a chance to answer them, and ensuring the individual understands the process.

R (HAM) v Brent LBC [2022] EWHC 1924 (Admin) at §11, 32

Excessive reliance on unreliable factors like appearance and demeanour in age assessments is problematic.

R (AB) v Kent County Council [2020] EWHC 109 (Admin) at §21(7)(8)

Outcomes

Permission for judicial review granted.

The court found the claim raised an arguable factual case that could succeed at a contested hearing, focusing on flaws in the credibility assessment and procedural aspects of the age assessment.

Case transferred to the Upper Tribunal for a factual determination.

The Upper Tribunal is the appropriate forum for a fresh factual determination on all available evidence, including potential fresh evidence.

Permission granted to amend the claim to include an age declaration as a remedy.

This amendment merely clarified what the court viewed as the inherent purpose of the claim.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.