AAA (Syria) & Ors., R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWCA Civ 266
AAA & Ors., R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
16 January 2023
[2023] EWHC 55 (Admin)
High Court
A court case about sending asylum seekers to Rwanda happened. The overall plan to send people to Rwanda was found to be legal, but some individuals won parts of their cases. Who had to pay court costs depended on who won and lost which parts of the case. Some people were allowed to appeal the decision to a higher court.
Key Facts
- •Judicial review claims concerning the legality of the Rwanda asylum plan.
- •Multiple claimants, including individuals and organizations.
- •Claims challenged various aspects of the plan on domestic and international law grounds.
- •The court handed down a judgment on December 19, 2022, and this document addresses consequential matters: orders, costs, and permission to appeal.
- •The court found for individual claimants on certain aspects of their individual claims but upheld the lawfulness of the overall Rwanda plan.
Legal Principles
CPR 44.2: Costs generally follow the unsuccessful party, but the court may make a different order considering all circumstances, including partial success.
Civil Procedure Rules
Othman test: Used to determine whether assurances provide sufficient guarantee against refoulement and Article 3 ill-treatment.
ECtHR case law (Othman)
Article 31 of the Refugee Convention: Defines penalties and their compatibility with the convention.
Refugee Convention
Part 5 of Schedule 3 to the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004: Certification power regarding asylum claims.
Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004
Articles 25 and 27 of the Procedures Directive (2005/85/EU): Relevant retained EU law provisions.
Procedures Directive (2005/85/EU)
Section 2 of the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993: Consistency with the Refugee Convention.
Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993
Common law procedural fairness: The scope of this principle in the context of asylum claims.
Common Law
Outcomes
Individual claimants' claims partially successful; overall Rwanda plan lawful.
Succeeded on individual challenges to asylum decisions but failed on generic challenges to the Rwanda plan's legality.
Costs orders varied: some claimants awarded a percentage of their costs, others ordered to pay costs.
Based on degree of success and other circumstances, including whether the claim was pursued reasonably.
Permission to appeal granted selectively on specific grounds.
Based on whether grounds have a realistic prospect of success or whether there are compelling circumstances, often focusing on points of broader legal significance.
Similar Cases
R (on the application of AAA (Syria) and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] UKSC 42
Miah Ibar Lone v Michael Andreas Petrou
[2024] EWHC 153 (KB)
DM, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 967 (Admin)
CVN, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Croydon
[2023] EWHC 865 (Admin)