R Arthur Obafemi Cecil Decker v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Philippa Whipple |
| Judgment Date | 19 February 2014 |
| Neutral Citation | [2014] EWHC 354 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 19 February 2014 |
| Docket Number | Case Nos: CO/4484/2012 CO/12553/2012 |
[2014] EWHC 354 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Philippa Whipple QC
Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge
Case Nos: CO/4484/2012
CO/6383/2012
CO/12553/2012
Mr Zainul Jafferji (instructed by Seraphus Solicitors) for the Claimant
Ms Susan Chan (instructed by The Treasury Solicitor) for the First Defendant
Philippa Whipple QC:
BACKGROUND
I have before me three judicial review applications each brought by the Claimant, a national of Sierra Leone, who seeks to challenge his enforced removal to that country pursuant to a Deportation Order. The Claimant is currently detained pending deportation.
The first and third judicial reviews are brought against the Secretary of State for the Home Department. I shall refer to the Secretary of State as the "Defendant" in this judgment. The first judicial review challenges the validity of the Deportation Order signed by the Defendant on 27 January 2009, and the detention of the Claimant on 24 April 2012 with a view to enforcing that Deportation Order. The third judicial review challenges the Defendant's refusal to revoke the Deportation Order contained in a letter dated 20 August 2012, as well as the certification of the Claimant's human rights claim as clearly unfounded, and the refusal to grant an in-country right of appeal.
The second judicial review is brought against the Upper Tribunal (Asylum and Immigration Chamber), which refused permission on 9 May 2012 to appeal against the decision of First Tier Tribunal Judge Devittie promulgated on 27 March 2012 (the "FTT"). The Upper Tribunal was not represented before me and played no part in this judicial review, although the Defendant, named as an Interested Party in the second judicial review, made submissions.
The Claimant was represented by Mr Zainul Jafferji and the Defendant was represented by Ms Susan Chan. I am grateful to both for their written and oral submissions, and for their efficient presentation which meant that this case was heard in one day.
FACTS
This case has a long history. The following facts are taken substantially from the Defendant's Detailed Grounds of Defence. I do not understand them to be in dispute.
On 19 May 2000, the Claimant who was born on 31 December 1984 arrived in the UK with his sister Winifred. They were granted leave to enter for 6 months as visitors. On 7 August 2001, Winifred claimed asylum and asked for the Claimant to be treated as her dependent. On 9 October 2001, Winifred's asylum application was refused. The Claimant was served with notice of his liability to removal as an overstayer. On 22 October 2001 the Claimant lodged an appeal against the refusal decision. On 12 March 2003, the Claimant's appeal was dismissed.
In July 2003, the Claimant applied for discretionary leave. His application was supported by documents, which it later transpired were forgeries, stating that he had a life threatening medical condition. On 22 October 2003 the Claimant was granted discretionary leave to remain for 6 months on the basis of the information contained in the documents he had submitted. In November 2004, the Claimant started to live with his other sister Jennifer, who is a British citizen. On 29 March 2005, the Claimant was charged with two counts under the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 in relation to the forged documents, one count of obtaining leave to remain in the UK by deception and one count of facilitating a breach of immigration laws by a non-EU national. On 5 August 2005, the Claimant was convicted of two offences of seeking to obtain leave by deception at Croydon Crown Court and was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment.
On 17 March 2008, the Claimant was notified of the Defendant's decision to make a deportation order against him. On 24 July 2008, the Claimant appealed against the notified intention to make a deportation order. On 21 August 2008 the Claimant applied for a residence card as the spouse of a French national. His application was refused as it turned out, by reference to documents held by the Defendant, that his spouse was already married. On 4 January 2009, the Claimant left the UK to live with his sister Jennifer in Ireland. The Claimant did not notify the Defendant that he had departed. On 8 January 2009, the Claimant withdrew his appeal against the decision dated 17 March 2008 to make a deportation order against him.
On 27 January 2009, the Defendant signed a deportation order in respect of the Claimant ("the Deportation Order"). As the Claimant had not presented himself for immigration reporting, the Deportation Order was served to file in accordance with Regulation 7(2) of Immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003.
In September 2009, the Irish authorities granted the Claimant an EEA residence card as an extended family member of his sister Jennifer, who was exercising her EEA right of free movement in Ireland. In October 2009, the Claimant arrived back in the UK (it is not known how he came back in; the Defendant has no record of his re-entry). On 28 October 2009, the Claimant made an application for an EEA Residence card on the basis that he was dependent upon his sister Jennifer. On 6 January 2010, the Claimant's application for an EEA Residence card was refused by the Defendant. On 9 September 2010, Mr Justice Collins granted permission to seek Judicial Review of the Defendant's decision to refuse to grant an EEA residence card to the Claimant. On 14 December 2010, the Defendant agreed to reconsider the Claimant's application for an EEA Residence Card and the judicial review proceedings were settled by consent.
On 4 March 2011 the Defendant refused the Claimant's application for an EEA residence card, on reconsidering it. On 18 July 2011, in light of fresh evidence which had been provided by the Claimant and with the agreement of both parties, Immigration Judge Rowlands, sitting in the First Tier Tribunal, allowed an appeal against the Defendant's decision of 4 March 2011 to the extent that it was remitted to the Defendant for further reconsideration. On 8 August 2011, the Defendant refused the Claimant's application for an EEA residence card on further consideration of it. On 11 January 2012, a supplementary reasons for refusal letter, to correct administrative errors and clarify certain issues in the letter of 8 August 2011, was sent to the Claimant.
On 27 March 2012, the Claimant's appeal against the refusal to grant him an EEA residence card was refused by the FTT. On 17 April 2012, the Claimant's application to the First-tier Tribunal for permission to appeal was refused. On 24 April 2012, the Claimant was detained pending removal. On 25 April 2012, the Claimant was served with removal directions for 2 May 2012. On 27 April 2012, the Claimant applied to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal.
On 30 April 2012, the first judicial review claim form was issued (ref CO/4484/2012), the "First JR". This challenged the validity of the Deportation Order and the decision to detain the Claimant. The Claimant also applied for interim relief, namely an order requiring the Defendant to release him. On 30 April 2012, Mr Justice Sales refused to order that the Claimant be released on the basis of his immigration and offending history, including the risk of his absconding to avoid removal. The removal directions were subsequently vacated.
On 9 May 2012, the Upper Tribunal refused permission to appeal. On 8 June 2012, HHJ Mackie QC (sitting as a deputy High Court Judge) refused permission in the First JR on the papers.
On 19 June 2012, the second judicial review claim form was issued (ref CO/6383/2012), the "Second JR". This challenged the Upper Tribunal's decision to refuse permission to appeal on grounds of EU law and on the basis of an assertion of two unfair and unsafe findings of fact by the FTT. On 20 June 2012, Mr C M Ockelton (sitting as a deputy High Court Judge) granted permission to the Claimant to amend his grounds in the first JR and ordered the Defendant not to remove the Claimant until determination of the application for permission in the first JR, joining the first and second JRs. On 20 August 2012 the Defendant, having treated the Second JR as an application to revoke the Deportation Order, refused to revoke it. On 20 August 2012, Timothy Straker QC (sitting as a deputy High Court Judge) refused permission in the Second JR on the papers. He ordered that if a renewal notice was served, the oral hearing should be heard at the same time as the renewal application in the First JR. On 6 September 2012, Robin Purchas QC (sitting as a deputy High Court Judge) heard the applications for permission in the First and Second JRs and granted permission on one ground only (ie the issue of unlawful detention raised in the First JR).
On 17 September 2012, the Claimant filed an application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the order of Robin Purchas QC refusing permission in the Second JR. On 19 October 2012, the Claimant filed an application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the order of Robin Purchas QC refusing permission on the other ground in the First JR (validity of Deportation Order).
On 8 November 2012, the Defendant made an application to discharge the injunction granted by Mr C M Ockelton on 20 June 2012 which prevented removal of the Claimant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R Arthur Obafemi Cecil Decker v Secretary of State for The Home Department (First Respondent) The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (Second Respondent)
...(CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT PHILIPPA WHIPPLE QC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge [2014] EWHC 354 (Admin) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Lord Justice Jackson Lord Justice Lewison and Lord Justice Hamblen Case No: C4/2014/0......