Hashem, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

J U D G M E N T

MR JUSTICE NICOL: This is an application for judicial review for the immigration decision. The claim was lodged on 27 January 2012. Permission was granted by His Honour Judge McKenna on 17 October 2012. The case was stayed behind that of Hamzeh 2013 EWHC 4113. In a judgment given by Simler J on 20 December 2013, the Secretary of State's case was successful.

The Treasury Solicitor wrote to the claimant, who was then represented by the solicitors Barnes, Harrild & Dyer on 14 March 2014, asking whether the claimant intended to proceed. There appears to have been no response to that letter and the Treasury Solicitor chased on 18 September 2014.

On 25 September 2014, Barnes, Harrild & Dyer replied:

"I write further to your letter of 18 September 2014. Please note that we no longer act for the above claimant in this matter. We have not had instructions from the claimant for a considerable amount of time, and are unable to contact him on the contact details previously provided to us. In the event that the claimant contacts us, we shall forward on your details to him."

On 3 October 2014, when the case was in the list for today, that is Wednesday 8 October, for a hearing of the substantive application for judicial review, I made a direction that the case would instead be listed for directions and/or dismissal.

I directed that if the claimant's solicitor wished to apply for an order under CPR rule 42.3 , they must make such an application forthwith. Notice of the application must be given to the claimant in accordance with rule 42.3(2)(a) and if that is not possible, the claimant's solicitors must in a witness statement give evidence as to why not, in addition to evidence in support of the application.

I said that the hearing on 8 October would not deal with the substantive merits of the judicial review. I was anxious that the defendant should not be put to the expense of briefing counsel on such a substantive hearing, if, as seemed likely, it was not to take place.

The claimant's solicitors thereafter served a witness statement dated 7 October, made by Miss R Peta Barua. In that witness statement, she says that the Legal Aid Agency discharged the claimant's legal aid certificate on 8 May 2014, and she produced a certificate to that effect, saying that the assisted person had not returned the form sent for him to enable his or her financial resources to be reconsidered.

Furthermore, she says this:

"The claimant attended my office on 23 Sept