Mohammed, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE JAY
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
- Human Rights Law
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Fatya Mohammed's application for judicial review follows the Secretary of State's refusal to accept her marriage as a basis for residency in the UK. MR JUSTICE JAY determined that the claimant could not challenge the second immigration decision within the original judicial review process and the Secretary of State's decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable. Consequently, her application was dismissed.
Judgment
Clare Moulder :
This is a claim challenging the legality of the claimant’s detention under the Immigration Act 1971 . Proceedings were commenced by the claimant acting in person on 27 th July 2011.
Orders
The matter has been before the court several times over the past few years:
On 9 December 2011 permission was refused by Owen J on the papers on the basis that there was a significant risk of him re-offending and of absconding, if released on bail, his failure to cooperate with the process of obtaining an ETD and the likelihood that an ETD would be received within a reasonable time from the Moroccan authorities.
On 27 February 2012 by order of Wilkie J the claimant was given permission to amend his grounds of claim and for the defendant to make disclosure of certain items.
On [20] 25 April 2012, Irwin J granted permission to apply for judicial review and on 18 May 2012, Irwin J ordered bail to be granted. The claimant was released on 1 June 2012.
On 19 April 2013 the matter was stayed by consent order upon the parties confirming they wished to explore the possibility of settlement.
On 8 November 2013 upon the parties being unable to agree a settlement the matter was set down for a substantive hearing and the defendant was ordered to file and serve detailed grounds of defence and any further evidence relied on.
Claim in outline
The claimant was detained under the Immigration Acts between 14 September 2007 and 1 June 2012.
The claimant’s case is that:
his detention was of unreasonable duration in all the circumstances and so unlawful;
the defendant cannot show on the balance of probabilities that the claimant would be removed within a further reasonable period, having regard to (i) the very lengthy period of time already spent in detention and (ii) the difficulties the defendant has in returning undocumented Moroccan nationals to Morocco;
the defendant failed to act with reasonable diligence and expedition to remove the claimant from the United Kingdom and thus was in breach of the Hardial Singh principles 2, 3 and 4;
in any event he was unlawfully detained from 14 September 2007 to 9 September 2008 during which time the unlawful policy considered by the Supreme Court in Lumba v the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] 2 WLR 671 was in force;
He was further falsely imprisoned between 2 December 2009 and 14 July 2011, during which time the defendant’s reviews of his detention “[did] not partake of the quality or c