AMX -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department
Administrative CourtHigh CourtImmigration and Asylum Chamber (Upper Tribunal)King's Bench DivisionOrder
Case number: AC 2024- LON-001355
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
and in relation to cases in the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
22 July 2024
Before:
The Honourable Mrs Justice Collins Rice DBE CB
(sitting as a Judge of both the High Court and the Upper Tribunal)
Between:
R (on the application of AMX)
-v-
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Order
UPON the claim of SM & Others v SSHD (AC-2024-LON-001789) having since been settled by consent order dated 11 July 2024.
AND UPON a directions hearing having taken place before Collins Rice J, sitting as a Judge of both the High Court and the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) on 28 June 2024, which was subsequently adjourned to 19 July 2024 pending the consideration by the parties of further case management directions.
AND UPON the Defendant confirming that no future removals of individuals to Rwanda under the Migration and Economic Development Partnership (‘MEDP’) are scheduled or intended to be scheduled.
AND UPON the Defendant also confirming that she will make a substantive decision on the merits of the asylum claims of the Claimants, and that the Claimants will be treated as having
joined the UK asylum system on the date the Claimants first claimed asylum.
AND UPON the Defendant confirming that all of the MEDP cohort will have the merits of their substantive asylum claims determined in the UK
AND UPON the Court indicating the desirability that all parties that have similar claims/challenge the same policy and practice as AMX, including (i) all those that were at the 28 June hearing; (ii) all those parties with similar claims who may already have agreed proposed forms of consent order and (iii) any other parties of which the Defendant is aware should seek to propose to the court a form of order by consent (or, where an existing form of order for settlement has already been proposed to the court, to propose a new form of order by consent) on the same terms as those set out below at paragraphs 1-4 by making a short informal application (absent exceptional circumstances) by midday on 25th July 2024 to the Court indicating that they wish to be added as a party scheduled to this order
AND UPON this order superseding the directions to trial in the Court’s order sealed on 5th July 2024 such that those directions are discharged
AND UPON the Court stating that this Order does not represent any judicial determination of anonymity
BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Claimant has leave to withdraw their claims for judicial review.
2. The Defendant to pay the Claimant’s reasonable costs on the standard basis to be determined by detailed assessment if not agreed.
3. The court will make an order for a payment on account of costs in favour of the Claimant pursuant to CPR 44.2(8) and gives directions at (i)-(iii) below for the determination of the amount.
i) The Claimant will serve on the Defendant a schedule of costs (using Form N260) by 4pm on 16 August 2024.
ii) The Defendant may serve comments on the schedule within 28 days of receipt.
iii) In default of agreement as to the payment on account of costs within 14 days thereafter, the Claimant shall file the schedule and comments at court, and the court will consider the schedules and comments without a hearing and will direct the amount of the payment on account and the date by which it must be made.
4. To the extent necessary, there be a detailed assessment of the Claimant’s legally aided costs.
5. The directions at paragraphs 2-14 of the order of the Court in this claim dated 5th July 2024 are discharged.
6. The Defendant shall send a copy of this order (together with the Statement of Matters) to all claimants with similar cases in the Administrative Court and Upper Tribunal Proceedings including (i) all those that were at the 28 June hearing; (ii) all those parties with similar claims who may already have agreed proposed forms of consent order and (iii) any others of which the Defendant is aware by midday on 22 July 2024.
7. All parties served with this order pursuant to paragraph 6 above shall by midday on 25th July either (a) apply to the court requesting to be added to the schedule to this order such that their claim will be settled on the same terms as set out in this order; or (b) explain why their claim is not to be settled on the same terms as those set out in this order.
8. The claims of those parties listed in the schedule hereto are withdrawn upon the same terms as those set out at paragraphs 1-5 above.
List of Parties Scheduled to this Order whose Claims are Settled on the Same Terms as Paragraphs 1-4
STATEMENT OF MATTERS PURSUANT TO PD 54A PARA 17
- In this claim for judicial review the Claimant challenged:
a. The Defendant’s delay in reaching decisions as to the admissibility of their individual asylum claim; and
b. The lawfulness of the Defendant’s “pause” in decision-making in respect of those who had been issued with notices of intent (NOIs) referencing the possibility of removal to Rwanda (“the MEDP cohort”), which was formalized by the SSHD on 14 February 2024. - The MEDP was entered into between the UK and Rwanda on 13 April 2022 and from around mid-May 2022 the SSHD began to issue notices of intent (NOIs) to asylum seekers where there was evidence that the individual had arrived in the UK by way of a dangerous journey and had been present in or had a connection with a safe third country. Following the general election and the change of government the SSHD has been giving careful consideration as to how to manage the MEDP cohort. She has confirmed that all of that cohort will have the merits of their asylum claims substantively determined in the UK.
- The SSHD has agreed to treat the Claimants (and all others from the MEDP cohort) as having joined the UK asylum system on the date when they first claimed asylum. In practice that means that their claims will be dealt with as a priority and, in general and with a view to fairness overall, will be prioritised ahead of any cases where asylum was claimed on a later date. The SSHD operates guidance in the form of the ‘Asylum decision making prioritisation guidance’ dated 11 October 2023 which makes clear that exceptional cases will be prioritised including those involving e.g. serious physical or mental health problems. In those circumstances, there are measures in place which will ensure that cases in the MEDP cohort are prioritised within the asylum system.
- The Defendant has agreed to pay the Claimant’s reasonable costs to be assessed on the standard basis.
- By reason of the above the principal relief sought by the Claimant has been secured and the parties therefore propose that pursuant to paragraph 17.2 to PD54A the Court make the order in the terms proposed.
- For these reasons the Court is asked to approve the terms of this order.