Da Silva -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionOrder

Claim number: AC-2025-LON-004427

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

11 December 2025

Before:

Mr Justice Murray

Between:

The King on the application of
Sophia Rodrigues Da Silva

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department


Order

On an urgent application by the Claimant for interim relief

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Murray

1.       The Claimant’s application for interim relief is refused.

Reasons

1. This matter has been transferred to the High Court from UTIAC by UTJ Hirst as it includes a challenge to the Claimant’s detention.

2. The Claimant has filed an urgent application for interim relief seeking her release from immigration detention. She is acting as a litigant in person. Making allowances for that and carefully reviewing the materials with that in mind, the papers amount to many assertions of violations of rights and so on, but with no indication of the supporting evidence, and of course without the benefit of any evidence or submissions from the Defendant.

3. The Claimant’s papers appear to be missing some important documents. I have therefore contacted OSCU for further information. The Claimant appears to consider that there is still a decision pending under the NRM, but after she was referred on 5 March 2025, a negative reasonable grounds decision was made on 11 March 2025. There is therefore no pending decision in that regard.

4. The Claimant’s asylum claim was refused on 22 October 2025, at which point the Claimant was on immigration bail. Removal directions are in process for 28 December 2025. There appear to be no barriers to her removal. She was detained pending removal on 4 December 2025.

5. On the papers before me, without determining the question of permission in relation to the judicial review claim, there is, in my view, no issue to be tried in relation to the challenge to the Claimant’s detention, and therefore no basis for interim relief.