Refugee Action, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- THE HON. MR JUSTICE POPPLEWELL
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Immigration Law
- Human Rights Law
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves challenge to the Defendant's decision to freeze asylum support rates for 2013/2014, based on the obligations under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and relevant EU law. The Claimant is a charity supporting refugees, and the Court found that the decision was based on flawed information and lacked sufficient investigation, thus quashing the decision for reconsideration.
Judgment
The Hon. Mr Justice Popplewell:
Introduction
This is an application for judicial review of the Defendant’s decision, announced to Parliament on 6 June 2013, that the level of support provided in cash to meet the essential living needs of asylum seekers for the financial year 2013/2014 should remain frozen at the rates which had applied since 2011. Such support is provided pursuant to sections 95 to 98 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (“the 1999 Act”). The weekly amounts are set out in Regulations 10(2) and 10A of the Asylum Support Regulations 2000 (“the AS Regulations 2000”).
The claim is brought in the interests of all asylum seekers by the Claimant, which is a charity established in 1981 to support and work with refugee communities in order to facilitate the successful resettlement in the UK of refugees and asylum seekers. In recent years it has been funded predominantly by the Defendant in order to provide advice and assistance to asylum seekers at regional centres, with the remainder of its income coming from charitable grants and individual donations.
It is worth emphasising at the outset that the question is not what the Court considers to be the appropriate amount to meet the essential living needs of asylum seekers. That judgment does not lie with the unelected judges, but is vested by Parliament in the elected government of the day. The latter’s decision can only be challenged on well recognised public law principles.
Judicial review is sought on the following grounds:
The Defendant’s decision that the current rates of asylum support are sufficient to meet the essential living needs of asylum seekers is incompatible with her obligations under EU law and in any event is irrational. No sufficient investigation has been conducted into the level of support necessary to meet essential living needs. In taking the decision the Defendant has taken account of irrelevant considerations and/or material errors of fact, and has failed to take account of relevant considerations.
The Defendant has breached her public sector equality duties (“PSED”) under s. 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
The Defendant has breached her duty towards children under s. 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009.
A rolled up hearing of the application for permission, with the substantive hearing to follow immediately if permission is granted, was ordered by Kenneth Parker J on 23 August 2013.
An overview of support for asylum seekers
Unaccompan