[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Gorczak, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 168 (Admin) (14 January 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/168.html Cite as: [2015] EWHC 168 (Admin)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		14 January 2015

1. MR JUSTICE KNOWLES: This claim has an unhappily long procedural history, dating back to 2013. From my consideration of and advance reading of the materials, the lion's share of the reasons for the delay rest at the responsibility of the defendant.
2. The latest development has been a fresh decision by the defendant. I say nothing about its merits, but the very, very unfortunate thing is that that decision was not made until 8 December 2014. It has only recently come to the attention of counsel for the claimant, and grounds for challenge to it have not been fully formulated.
3. The fact and content of the decision on 8 December 2014 leaves conclusions on the appropriateness or otherwise of the decisions originally challenged by the claim at least largely academic. Having regard to the overall circumstances and history of the present case, and the undesirability of allowing a set of proceedings to roll forward from fresh decision to fresh decision, I have reached the firm conclusion that the right course is to conclude the current proceedings, make a suitable order for costs, and leave the claimant free to begin a challenge, if so advised, against the decision of 8 December. That can then be considered on its specific and focussed merits by the court in due course.
4. The order that I will make today, and I will ask counsel to prepare a draft and let me have sight of that, will contain a suitably worded recital which indicates the basis on which the matter has come to an end and that there is freedom to the claimant to commence a fresh challenge if so advised, which will be considered in the normal way, against the 8 December decision.
5. When I say freedom, I do not mean that any advance permission to apply for judicial review has been granted; I mean freedom to begin judicial review with the issue of a claim form.
6. On the basis of that recital, there will be no order in the present proceedings save in relation to costs, and in relation to costs I am quite clear, having regard to the overall history of the matter, that the defendant should pay the costs up to and including 8 December. So far as the period after 8 December is concerned, two things have particularly occupied the claimant. The first is work towards preparation of draft amended grounds so as to extend the challenge to include the 8 December decision. It seems to me that that work is properly work that will come into its own in relation to any forthcoming proceedings challenging the 8 December proceedings, and I shall not make any order in relation to that work in these proceedings.
7. Then there are the costs of today's hearing. Again, very late, the defendant sought to adjourn today's hearing. That late attempt was, initially at least, opposed by the claimant. To some degree it can also fairly be said, especially given the course I have taken, that it was in the end necessary for the matter to be in front of the court today. However, in the overall exercise of my discretion, I propose to make no order as to costs in relation to the period from 8 December and including today.
8. So the costs up to and including 8 December will be paid by the defendant to the claimant, to be assessed on the standard basis. There will be no order as to costs for the period after that, including today.
9. MR JUSTICE KNOWLES: Are you content to formulate an order? The reason I haven't spelt out myself the recital is that you'll both have things that you want to be comfortable on in it, and so I'll leave you to try and draft that. If it becomes difficult, then I'll impose some wording, but see if you can come up with wording that sensibly leaves you both in the place you want to be for the start of any new proceedings.
10. MR KHUBBER: Thank you.
11. MR JUSTICE KNOWLES: Will you perhaps email that to the learned associate and she can pass it through to me.
12. MR KHUBBER: Yes, if I could have the email details, that's great. I will try and liaise now and try and get that done as soon as possible.
13. MR JUSTICE KNOWLES: Yes, if we could tie it up today that would be brilliant. Is there anything?
14. MR KHUBBER: No.
15. MR JUSTICE KNOWLES: All right. Thank you very much indeed.