Williams (by his litigation friend Richard Williams) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Davis,Lord Justice Underhill |
| Judgment Date | 13 January 2017 |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] EWCA Civ 64 |
| Date | 13 January 2017 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | C4/2015/1829 |
[2017] EWCA Civ 64
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT
High Court
(MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2A 2LL
Lord Justice Davis
Lord Justice Underhill
C4/2015/1829
Mr Stephen Knafler QC and Mr Yaaser Vanderman (instructed by Central England Law Centre) appeared on behalf of the Appellant
Mr William Hanson (instructed by Government Legal Department) appeared on behalf of the Respondent
This matter has been listed before this court today of the court's own motion to determine whether what is currently listed as a substantive appeal, due to be heard next week before myself, my Lord, Lord Justice Underhill, and Lady Justice Macur, should go ahead or whether the appeal should be dismissed at this stage without a substantive hearing.
The reason why the matter comes before the court today is simply this. It is not in dispute that as between the parties themselves this matter has become academic. It has become academic because the appellant has since the decision below been granted British citizenship which was the entire object of the original proceedings. It can however fairly be said, and Mr Knafler QC for the appellant has said, that, in substance, the matter was academic even before the judge below Mr Justice Hickinbottom. That is because leave to remain had by then been granted to the appellant, albeit relatively shortly before the hearing, and the circumstances of destitution had, in effect, gone away. Mr Justice Hickinbottom, in fact, accepted that proposition. He gave a reasoned decision as to why, nevertheless, he was prepared to entertain substantively the case albeit it could be said to be academic. Those reasons are fully set out in his judgment, in particular, at paragraph 57.
The fact, nevertheless, is that on any view this appeal is now academic as between the parties. The fact also is that permission to appeal was previously granted by my Lord, Lord Justice Underhill, which connotes that this case is properly assessed as realistically arguable: even though the judgment of Mr Justice Hickinbottom was described in the grant of permission to appeal as "persuasive".
It may be noted that as part of the procedural history there was an exchange of correspondence between the parties, initiated by the Government Legal Department in September 2016, whereby it was queried whether there was any purpose in the appeal proceeding given that the appellant had now attained British citizenship. On instructions the solicitors for the appellant, through his father, indicated that it was sought to maintain the appeal. There the matter rested as between the parties. No application was made at that stage to have the appeal dismissed and it was indicated by the Court Office that, accordingly, the matter would remain in the List.
The matter only resurrected itself when I, as prospective presiding judge of the constitution hearing the appeal, and after a preliminary perusal of the papers, raised the point as to whether or not the appeal should be heard. This was shortly before Christmas. The Christmas vacation then intervened and, in the result, the parties were only able to formulate their written submissions on this point in the early part of January. Thus it is that the matter comes before this court today, just a few days before the actual prospective appeal hearing.
It is perhaps one feature of the case that although the appeal is academic there is no agreement as to whether or not the appeal should be pursued. The general principle is that this court will not entertain appeals which are academic as between the parties. The principles are set out in the House of Lords' decision in Salem, as well...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R A (A Minor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...also another case, called Williams, which was considered by the Court of Appeal in a judgment for which the neutral citation number is [2017] EWCA Civ 64. In that case the Court of Appeal, of its own motion, considered whether it should proceed with the appeal on the grounds that it had be......
-
R (on the application of Williams) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
...LJ and Underhill LJ) ruled that, exceptionally, the court would nevertheless entertain the appeal for the reasons there given: see [2017] EWCA Civ 64. The legal framework 13 The legislative framework is set out in meticulous detail by Hickinbottom J in his judgment. Since anyone reading th......
-
R VF v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...to whether his claim was academic because the relevant claimant had by then obtained citizenship. Davis LJ on 30 th January 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 64 at para.6 cited Salem. He noted that the general principle is that the Court of Appeal would not entertain appeals which are academic as betwe......