In judgment handed down on 26 October 2023 in the case of R (NS) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 2675 (Admin), The Honourable Mr Justice Saini found that the Secretary of State for the Home Department made two decisions regarding the accommodation of a vulnerable asylum seeker, NS, away from his support network, unlawfully, and made a declaration to that effect, as outlined at paragraph 47 of the judgment.

Although permission was refused in respect of the second ground of challenge that sought to establish that the Asylum Seekers with Care Needs Guidance was unlawful, Saini J made some important observations in respect of the Guidance at paragraph 45, noting that he considered there to be force in the Claimant’s argument on the merits and “In my judgment, there appears to be force in Leading Counsel for the Claimant’s submission that the SSHD’s duty under s.98 of the 1999 Act is not suspended pending the completion of a local authority assessment, and therefore the relevant part of the Guidance appears to instruct caseworkers to approach applications on an unlawful basis.” It is hoped that following this, the SSHD will take note and amend the Guidance accordingly.

The case concerned a vulnerable asylum seeker who was initially refused accommodation under Section 98 Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because the SSHD required that he undergo a Care Needs Assessment by the local authority due to the requirements of the Asylum Seekers with Care Needs Policy. Ultimately, NS was granted urgent interim relief on 1 June 2023 to be accommodated by the SSHD with immediate effect. However, the SSHD decided to accommodate NS away from his support network, despite there being considerable evidence as to the important of his support network to his mental health issues, which the local authority’s Care Needs Assessment supported.

Key paragraphs at 39 and 40 criticised the SSHD for the failure to engage and failure to provide any evidence to the Court to support the decision-making. Importantly, at paragraph 40, the Honourable Mr Justice Saini states “It is a matter of concern that the SSHD sought to defend these decisions. Such a litigation approach wastes court time and resources, taxpayers’ money (on each side) and delays justice for vulnerable persons such as the Claimant.”

Recognition was given at the end of the judgment, in paragraph 48, of the exceptional work done by NS’s support worker at South London Refugee Association and his counsellor from Off The Record.

The full judgment can be read here.

Olivia was instructed by Lawstop Solicitors.

Olivia accepts instructions in all areas of public and human rights law. To instruct Olivia in similar public law matters, please feel free to contact civil clerk, Charleigh Thurston, on charleigh@33br.co.uk.