AAX -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2026-LON-003024

In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court

In the matter of an application for permission
to bring Judicial Review proceedings

16 July 2026

Before:

Mr Alan Bates,
sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court

Between:

The King
on the application of
AAX
(Claimant)

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department
(Defendant)

Order

Before Mr Alan Bates sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court on 16 July 2026 at the Royal Courts of Justice

UPON the Claimant’s applications for permission to bring Judicial Review proceedings

AND UPON the Claimant’s Application Notice dated 10 July 2026 (the “10 July Application”) including an application for interim relief

AND UPON hearing Counsel for the Claimant (Philip Nathan) and Counsel for the Defendant (Jack Holborn)

AND UPON the Court’s understanding of the Claimant’s situation being that:

(i) he is a citizen of Libya;

(ii) he suffers from serious mental ill-health including complex post-traumatic stress disorder and psychosis;

(iii) he has been convicted, in a criminal court in this jurisdiction, of a criminal offence committed in the jurisdiction, for which he was sentenced to imprisonment for a fixed term (the “Prison Sentence”);

(iv) he is, in principle, no longer subject to detention pursuant to the Prison Sentence, as he has already served the custodial element of the Prison Sentence and was accordingly entitled to be released, and has been released, from detention in the prison estate, on condition that he complies with the terms of his release on licence (“Licence Terms”) and subject to the supervision of an Offender Manager from HM Prison and Probation Service (“HMPPS”);

(v) upon his being released from the prison estate, he was detained by the Defendant under her immigration control powers with a view to removing him from the United Kingdom, and held in an Immigration Removal Centre (“IRC”);

(vi) it has become apparent, and is accepted by the Defendant, that it has not been, and is unlikely in the immediate future to be, possible for the Defendant to effect his removal from the United Kingdom without his consent, as, by reason of his mental ill-health and/or other reasons relating to his personal circumstances and the situation in Libya, this would constitute a breach of Article 3 of the Convention Rights in the Human Rights Act 1998;

(vii) he has been granted Humanitarian Protection in the United Kingdom (valid to 8 December 2029);

(viii) he is currently still being detained in Brook House IRC;

(ix) his continuing detention is at risk of causing significant detriment to his mental health and he has been assessed as ‘Level 3’ under the Defendant’s Adults At Risk policy;

(x) the Defendant has accepted for at least the last 11 weeks that the Defendant cannot lawfully be removed to Libya in the immediate future and that arrangements should be made to release him from detention;

(xi) the reason why he has nevertheless remained in immigration detention is essentially delays in his accessing suitable accommodation in the community where he could live post-release;

(xii) it appears that, as he holds Humanitarian Protection, he is entitled to homelessness assistance from a local authority under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996, and further that he is in Priority Need (by reason of, inter alia, his mental health), and that the relevant local authority is the London Borough of Islington (“LB Islington”);

(xiii) he has not yet made an application to LB Islington for homelessness assistance, and says that he needs practical help in order to do so, given his mental health difficulties, language barrier, the fact that he is presently in detention, and also the fact that he has become separated from his belongings (including documents needed for proving his identity and that he has been granted Humanitarian Protection);

(xiv) although the Defendant has power under Schedule 10 to the Immigration Act 2016 to, in certain circumstances, provide accommodation in the community for a person being released from immigration detention, his situation does not appear to the Defendant to come within those circumstances and, anyway, the power is ‘residual’ in that it exists to enable accommodation to be provided to persons who have no other entitlement to accommodation (which is not the Claimant’s situation, given that he appears to be entitled to homelessness assistance from a local authority);

(xv) a further complexity involved in releasing him from detention is that, under the Licence Terms to which he remains subject, he is required to obtain approval from his offender manager at HMPPS for any address at which he resides;

(xvi) it is common ground between him and the Defendant (and the Court agrees) that he should be released from detention as soon as reasonably practicable but also that it is highly desirable (including from the perspective of the public interest) that such release occur in circumstances where he has appropriate accommodation in the community where he can reside in compliance with the Licence Terms and where he can be supported by appropriate mental health and other services; and

(xvii) the reasons why this is highly desirable in the public interest include the need to mitigate risks he might pose to the public: the level of such risks could be increased if his mental health were to deteriorate further in consequence of his being released into the community with no access to suitable accommodation

AND UPON the Claimant indicating that he is not seeking an interim order for his immediate release from detention without accommodation for him to live in being identified

AND UPON the Court noting that, as the Defendant has detained the Claimant and is continuing to detain him, the Defendant bears a weighty responsibility (pursuant to the value ascribed to the ‘liberty of the subject’ under the common law, and Article 5 of the Convention Rights) to make diligent practical endeavours for enabling her responsibly and properly to release the Claimant as soon as possible

AND UPON the Court expressing its hope and expectation that, in light of the Claimant’s circumstances summarised above: (a) LB Islington will address a homelessness application for social housing from the Claimant with appropriate pragmatism and expedition; and (b) the Claimant’s Offender Manager, and HMPPS generally, will act with all possible expedition to consider for approval, for the purposes of the Licence Terms, any address proposed by LB Islington or the Defendant

AND UPON the Court deciding that it is appropriate to list a further hearing, within the next few weeks, for assessing what progress has by then been made in securing appropriate accommodation for the Claimant and effecting his release from detention

AND UPON the Court declining to grant today the Claimant’s application for the Secretary of State for Justice (as the Minister responsible for HMPPS) to be joined to these proceedings, but instead indicating that consideration will be given at the next hearing to whether the Secretary of State for Justice, LB Islington, or any other person, should be joined to the proceedings (irrespective of whether a party has made a formal application for such joinder)

IT IS ORDERED that:

Anonymity, reporting restrictions, and restriction of third parties’ access to the court file

  1. Pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and/or the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and/or s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, in these proceedings:

(a) the Claimant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and

(b) the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as ‘AAX’.

  1. Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.
  2. Pursuant to CPR 5.4C(4):

(a) the parties must within 7 days file a redacted copy of any statement of case filed, omitting the name, address and any other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant;
(b) if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time; and
(c) unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party many obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.

  1. Any person wishing to vary or discharge the orders set out in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3 above must make an application, served on each party.

    Interim mandatory order requiring the Defendant to assist the Claimant in applying for housing assistance from a local authority
  2. Until further order or until the Claimant being released from detention in circumstances where there is accommodation in place for him in the community (whichever is the earlier), the Defendant must use reasonable endeavours to assist the Claimant to apply for, and secure, accommodation from LB Islington, including by:

    (a) providing written documentation (whether by way of copies of documents held by the Home Office, or the provision of confirmatory letters or other new documents) confirming his identity and Humanitarian Protection immigration status; and
    (b) instructing and ensuring that her relevant officials provide practical assistance to the Claimant to make the application from his current position detained at Brook House IRC and to respond to any follow-up enquiries from LB Islington relating to such application.
  1. By no later than 4pm on 28 July 2026 the Defendant must file and serve a witness statement from an appropriate official setting what the Defendant has done pursuant to the order at paragraph 5 above.

    Further hearing and other matters
  2. If the Defendant has not, by 4pm on 28 July 2026, notified the Administrative Court Office that the Claimant has been released from detention, there shall be a further hearing before Deputy High Court Judge Alan Bates on 30 July 2026 (time estimate 1 hour) which the Defendant must attend through legal representatives. (The hearing will take place at the Royal Courts of Justice and is likely to be listed for 10am. Any application to attend remotely must be made by Application Notice at least 24 hours before the hearing time.)
  3. Save insofar as they have been substantively determined by the above provisions of this Order, the question as to whether permission to apply for judicial review should be granted, and all applications made in these proceedings (including the 10 July Application) which had not been determined prior to today’s hearing, remain undetermined and are adjourned for further consideration at the hearing listed by paragraph 7 above.
  4. Costs reserved.

Dated 16 July 2026
BY THE COURT