[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 >> Mohammed, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 1744 (Admin) (20 April 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2016/1744.html Cite as: [2016] EWHC 1744 (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
		20 April 2016

1. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: The claimant, a national of Iran, was encountered in the United Kingdom on 13 July 2015 and pursuant to immigration powers was detained. He seeks judicial review of the following decisions of the defendant: (a) the decision to detain him in breach of the terms of regulation 604/2013 and (b) the decision to remove him to Italy.
2. The claimant, having been detained, was served with illegal entry papers and claimed asylum on 13 July 2015. On the same day, a scan of his fingerprints matched with records on the EURODAC database showing he had been fingerprinted in Italy on 14 June 2015. On 20 July 2015 a request for information was made to Italy pursuant to article 13(1) of the Dublin III regulations. No response was received within the specified time frame.
3. On 4 August 2015 Italy was deemed to accept responsibility for the claimant's case. By a decision dated 9 August 2015, the defendant certified the claimant's case on third country grounds. On 12 August 2015 removal directions were set for 20 August 2015. The claimant alleged that if removed to Italy he faced a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR.
4. On 14 August 2015 the defendant, pursuant to paragraph 5(4) of Part 2 to Schedule 3 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004 certified that such a claim was clearly unfounded. On 18 August 2015 the claimant instituted proceedings for judicial review following which the removal directions were cancelled. On 12 October 2015 the claimant's application for permission was refused by the Upper Tribunal Judge. On 22 October 2015 the Claimant was released from detention on bail.
5. On 11 November 2015 Neil Cameron QC sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge granted permission to the claimant to bring proceedings upon ground one, namely unlawful detention, and ground two, the removal to Italy. Within the order were case management directions which can be described as being in standard form, save that at that point the case was to be expedited as the claimant was believed to be in detention.
6. The defendant submitted detailed Grounds of Defence dated 17 December 2015 contesting both grounds. The Claimant when proceedings were instituted was represented by solicitors and by counsel who drafted the application. Subsequent to his release from detention on 22 October 2015, the claimant's solicitors have had no contact with him despite their best efforts to contact him by letter and telephone. Letters sent to the claimant at the address given to his solicitors have been returned stating that he is not there.
7. In the circumstances, the defendant's solicitors properly considered that they were without instructions in the matter. They referred the matter to the court and contacted the defendant. By a consent order dated 16 March 2016 it was ordered that the solicitors, Wilsons Solicitors LLP, have ceased to act for the claimant in this matter.
8. This morning, the court has been informed by counsel on behalf of the defendant that on 24 March 2016 solicitors acting on behalf of the defendant wrote to the claimant at his last known address seeking information as to his preparedness for trial, for example, the provision of a skeleton argument and other documents. In the letter, the claimant was urged to seek independent legal advice. No response was received to the letter.
9. As of this morning, the claimant has not appeared before the court and nothing at all has been heard from him. The claimant is in fact an absconder in that he has failed at any time to report in compliance with the condition of his immigration bail.
10. The position is thus: Nothing has been heard from the claimant. He has failed to comply with any of the case management directions contained in the order of Neil Cameron QC dated 11 November 2015. He has not appeared before the court. He is deemed to be an absconder and no one has any idea where he is.
11. In the circumstances, unsurprisingly, it is the defendant's application that this case should be dismissed. In my view, this is a wholly proper application given the complete absence on the part of the claimant to take any steps at all to progress his claim and in failing to turn up this morning. Accordingly, the defence application is granted and this claim is dismissed.
13. MR MITCHELL: Thank you. There is a point in respect of costs, which is this. From the point that Wilsons were no longer acting, although we have not seen the legal aid certificate, inferentially the protection of the legal aid would cease at that point. So I suppose in addition to making an application for costs not to be enforced without leave of the court for the period during which the Claimant benefited from his legal aid certificate, the period thereafter, which my instructing solicitor estimates --
14. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: Well, if they came off the record on 16 March of this year --
15. MR MITCHELL: Yes.
16. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: Yes.
17. MR MITCHELL: We have our costs from that date. We do not have a schedule, but I am informed they come to £1,200 which is the work done in the period since 16 March. So if I could ask, please, that that order for costs be made as against the Claimant himself.
18. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: So what actual order are you asking for?
19. MR MITCHELL: The first part would be that the costs up until 16 March 2016, the standard wording which, forgive me, I cannot remember, is not to be enforced --
20. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: Enforced without leave of the court.
21. MR MITCHELL: Yes, without leave of the court.
22. But the period thereafter, if I could ask, please, that the costs be summarily assessed in the sum of £1,200 to be paid by the Claimant --
23. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: Within 28 days.
24. MR MITCHELL: -- within 28 days.
25. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: Very well. I will order costs.

(1) The Defendant is obtain the costs of the action up until 16 March 2016, such order not be enforced without leave of the court. (2) Costs thereafter are assessed in the sum of £1,200 to be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant within 28 days of this order.

26. All right, Mr Mitchell?
27. MR MITCHELL: Yes. Thank you very much.
28. MRS JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES: I now hand these papers back.