SA, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWHC 1787 (Admin)
R (MQ) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
7 February 2023
[2023] EWHC 205 (Admin)
High Court
A mom and her kids were stuck in a hotel for a long time while waiting for a proper home. She sued the government, but the judge said the government followed the rules, even though it took a long time and many families are in the same boat.
Key Facts
- •MQ, a Jordanian asylum seeker with two young children, was granted initial accommodation in a Rochdale hotel.
- •After applying for full support, she remained in the hotel while waiting for dispersal accommodation.
- •MQ's requests to expedite her move to dispersal accommodation were refused.
- •MQ and her children were subsequently moved to a Preston hotel due to a flood at the first hotel.
- •After court intervention, they were finally moved to dispersal accommodation in Liverpool.
- •MQ challenged the Home Office's policy on the grounds of unlawful operation of an unpublished policy, fettering of discretion, breach of duty to consider children's best interests, inadequate accommodation, failure to account for material considerations, and breach of Article 8 rights.
Legal Principles
The Secretary of State has a statutory obligation to provide appropriate support, including accommodation, to destitute asylum seekers.
Part VI of the Asylum Act 1999
When exercising powers under section 95 to provide accommodation, the Secretary of State must have regard to the temporary nature of the accommodation and other prescribed matters.
Asylum Act 1999, section 97
In determining whether accommodation is adequate, the Secretary of State must have regard to prescribed matters but may not have regard to other prescribed matters or matters mentioned in section 95(6).
Asylum Act 1999, section 95(5)
The Secretary of State must make arrangements to ensure functions in relation to immigration, asylum, or nationality are discharged having regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.
Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009, section 55
The best interests of a child are a primary consideration in proportionality assessments under Article 8 ECHR.
Zoumbas v SoS [2013] UKSC 74
A public authority acts unlawfully by undermining the rule of law if its guidance sanctions unlawful conduct.
R (A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 37
An unpublished policy must not be inconsistent with published policy and should be published if it informs discretionary decisions where the individual has a right to make representations.
R (Lumba) v SSHD [2011] UKSC 12
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
The court found no evidence of an unlawful unpublished policy, concluding that the Secretary of State's actions were within her discretion and did not breach statutory duties or Article 8 rights.
Similar Cases
NS, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Office
[2023] EWHC 2675 (Admin)
Rawle Ganpot & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWHC 197 (Admin)
RMO v Secretary Of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 1826 (Admin)
ZR v London Borough of Haringey & Anor
[2024] EWHC 1476 (Admin)