FDA -v- Secretary of State for the Cabinet Office and another

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionOrder

Claim number: AC-2024-LON-001503

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

8 May 2024

Before:

The Hon. Mr Justice Chamberlain

Between:

The King on the application of
FDA

-v-

Secretary of State for the Cabinet Office

Minister for the Civil Service

Order

On the claimant’s application for variation of the directions contained in the Order of 3 May 2024

Following consideration of the claimant’s solicitor’s letter of 4 May 2024 and the Government Legal Department’s email of 7 May 2024

ORDER by the Hon. Mr Justice Chamberlain:

The application to vary the directions contained in the Order of 3 May is refused.

Reasons

In their letter of 2 May 2024 on behalf of the defendants, GLD said: “the earliest a removal is expected to take place is 1 to 15 July 2024”. My Order of 3 May 2024 set a timetable based on this information. On 3 May 2024, GLD wrote again, saying that they wished to provide a “clarification”, as follows:

“In the Prime Minister’s press conference on 22 April, he said the first flight would leave in 10 to 12 weeks. The 10th week after 22 April starts with the week commencing 24 June. We are instructed that this is the earliest possible date for the first removals and that the decision on the precise date will be based on operational considerations and progress over the coming weeks.”

In the light of that, the claimant says that the Order of 3 May 2024 was made on a false basis and invites the court to reconsider the timetable and list the case earlier, in w/c 27 May 2024, with consequential changes to the other directions.

By email of 7 May 2024, GLD confirms that the 24 June 2024 date is the correct one.

There was nothing unclear about what GLD said on 2 May 2024. What was said on 3 May 2024 was not a “clarification”, but a change of position. That should have been acknowledged frankly. Nonetheless, the timetable set out in the Order of 3 May 2024 is already stringent and it is not necessary, nor would it serve the interests of justice, to alter it.