GVA, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWHC 2838 (Admin)
R (on the application of H) v The Secretary Of State For The Home Department
3 November 2023
[2023] EWHC 2758 (Admin)
High Court
An Albanian man's asylum claim was rejected, and he was detained. A judge agreed to review whether the rejection and detention were fair, focusing on whether the government followed proper rules and guidelines about blood feuds and how long someone can be held.
Key Facts
- •Claimant, an Albanian citizen, applied for asylum in the UK, claiming fear of persecution due to a blood feud and debt to money lenders.
- •The Secretary of State rejected the asylum claim and certified it as 'clearly unfounded', removing the right of appeal.
- •The Claimant was detained from January 11, 2023, to June 7, 2023.
- •Judicial review challenged the certification and detention decisions.
- •Anonymity order granted to protect the Claimant.
Legal Principles
Certification of a claim as 'clearly unfounded' under s. 94 of the 2002 Act removes the right of appeal.
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
'Clearly unfounded' test requires a realistic prospect of success; if reasonable doubt exists, it's not clearly unfounded.
ZT (Kosovo) [2009] UKHL 6
Reviewing court's role in certification cases is supervisory; it shouldn't inappropriately deprive the Secretary of State of her function.
FR (Albania) [2016] EWCA Civ. 605
Detention pending removal must be reasonable; detention becomes unlawful if deportation isn't possible within a reasonable period.
R (Hardial Singh) v Governor of Durham Prison [1983] EWHC 1 (QB); R (I) [2002] EWCA Civ. 888
Public law errors in prior decisions affecting detention must be material; detention is unlawful if an unlawful prior decision is relevant to the detention decision.
R (Lumba) [2012] UKSC
Country guidance from the Upper Tribunal (UT) is binding on the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) unless there's cogent evidence to justify departure.
MST and Others (national service – risk categories) Eritrea CG [2016] UKUT 443 (IAC); Roba [2022] UKUT 1 (IAC)
Outcomes
Permission granted for judicial review on grounds 1, 4, 6, and 7.
Grounds 1 and 4 challenge the failure to properly consider country guidance on blood feuds and internal relocation; Ground 6 challenges the detention based on the unlawful certification; Ground 7 challenges the detention after April 27th as breaching Hardial Singh principles.
Permission refused for grounds 2, 3, and 5.
Grounds 2 and 3 were deemed not necessary to address given the success on other grounds; Ground 5, challenging detention before April 13th, was deemed not arguable given the realistic prospect of removal.
Similar Cases
YMB & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
[2024] EWHC 1950 (Admin)
KM, R (on the application of ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 2870 (Admin)
JXL, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWHC 510 (Admin)
DM, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 967 (Admin)