Asylum Aid, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
| Judge | Mr Justice Jay |
| Neutral Citation | [2025] EWHC 316 (Admin) |
| Date | 14 February 2025 |
| Counsel | Stephanie Harrison Kc,Emma Fitzsimons,Alan Payne Kc,Jack Anderson |
| Year | 2025 |
| Court | King's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWHC 316 (Admin)
Case No: AC-2024-LON-001479
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
KING'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Date: 14/02/2025
Before:
MR JUSTICE JAY
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:
THE KING (ASYLUM AID)
Claimant
- and –
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME
DEPARTMENT
Defendant
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Stephanie Harrison KC and Emma Fitzsimons (instructed by Freshfields LLP) for the
Claimant
Alan Payne KC and Jack Anderson (instructed by Government Legal Department) for the
Defendant
Hearing dates: 21 - 23 January 2025
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Approved Judgment
This judgment was handed down remotely at 10.30am on 14 February 2025 by circulation to
the parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.
.............................
MR JUSTICE JAY
Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. Asylum Aid v SSHD
MR JUSTICE JAY:
INTRODUCTION
1. In these judicial review proceedings, Asylum Aid (“the Claimant”) challenges
changes to the Immigration Rules in HC 246 taking effect on 31 January 2024 and
removing the ability of family members of stateless persons to apply for leave to enter
the UK on a bespoke basis which was simple, streamlined and did not require the
payment of a fee, and required them to apply instead under the general provisions of
Appendix FM. These latter requirements may fairly be described as complex, onerous
and – subject to the possibility of fee waiver – expensive.
2. There are four grounds of challenge. In outline, by Ground 1 the Claimant contends
that the Secretary of State for the Home Department (“the Defendant”) has breached
her public sector equality duty (“PSED”) under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
By Ground 2 it is contended that Defendant has breached section 55 of the Borders,
Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 (“the 2009 Act”). By Ground 3, it is said that
the Defendant has acted incompatibly with her international obligations to stateless
persons. Finally, by Ground 4 it is submitted that the Defendant has acted irrationally.
3. When I come to address the Claimant’s Grounds, I propose to adopt a different
sequence. The Claimant has its forensic reasons for seeking to present the arguments
in a particular order, but for reasons of logic and clarity it seems to me that I should
begin with Ground 3. The nature of the Defendant’s obligations to stateless persons,
including on the Claimant’s argument their dependants, colours the remainder of the
Grounds. Ground 4 should be considered next, followed by Ground 2 and then,
finally, Ground 1.
4. The parties have brought voluminous documentation, authority and submissions to
these issues. This reflects the importance of the point of principle that the claim raises,
albeit these recent changes impact a relatively limited cohort of individuals. I thank
counsel for their detailed and helpful submissions. Where possible I will be seeking to
simplify some of the evidence. The devil may lie in the detail, but not all of it needs to
be expressly set out.
STATELESSNESS
5. The leading authority on the topic in this jurisdiction is the decision of the Supreme
Court in Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] UKSC 62;
[2014] 1 AC 253. At para 12 Lord Wilson JSC cited with approval the dissenting
judgment of Earl Warren CJ in Perez v Brownell [1958] 356 US 44, at para 64, where
the latter described the right to nationality as “man’s basic right, for it is nothing less
than the right to have rights”. In the same paragraph Lord Wilson added that, despite
the development of international human rights law over the preceding 50 years,
“worldwide legal disabilities with terrible practical consequences still flow from lack
of nationality”. Similar observations may be found in the Strasbourg jurisprudence.
6. The Claimant’s evidence provides a helpful elaboration of Lord Wilson’s basic point.
In short, there are multifarious disadvantages which typically flow from lacking
Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. Asylum Aid v SSHD
access to recognisable citizenship including: legal vulnerability; lack of identity
documents; limited access to public services; economic hardship and exclusion; social
exclusion; barriers to assimilation and integration; family separation; risk of detention
and deportation; risk of human trafficking; and, restrictions on freedom of movement.
7. Much of this is accepted by the Defendant in her own documentation. For example, in
the Home Office Guidance, Permission to Stay as a Stateless Person, Version 3.0,
March 2024:
“Possession of nationality is considered essential for full
participation in society and a pre-requisite for the enjoyment of
the full range of human rights. Stateless people are not
necessarily at risk of persecution or serious harm in their
country of habitual residence, but they are potentially
vulnerable to serious discrimination. They may, for example,
be denied the right to own land or exercise the right to vote.
They are often unable to obtain identity documents. They can
be denied access to education and health services or blocked
from obtaining employment.”
8. Ms Stephanie Harrison KC placed particular emphasis on the international
instruments which have accorded special recognition to the predicament of stateless
persons.
9. Under Article 15 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights published in
1948, “everyone has a right to nationality”. Under Article 16(3):
“The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of
society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.”
10. Under the 1954 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons
(“the 1954 Convention”), which the United Kingdom has ratified, “a stateless person”
is defined by Article 1 as a “person who is not considered a national by any State
under the operations of its law”. The Introductory Note and Preamble to the
Convention recognise their particular plight:
“(Introductory Note) To overcome the profound vulnerability
that affects people who are stateless and to help resolve the
practical problems they face in their everyday lives, the
Convention upholds the right of freedom of movement for
stateless persons lawfully on their territory, and requires States
to provide them with identity papers and travel documents.
…
(Preamble) Considering that the United Nations has, on
various occasions, manifested its profound concern for stateless
persons and endeavoured to assure stateless persons the widest
possible exercise of these fundamental rights and freedoms.”
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting