The claimant sought judicial review of decisions:
‘i) The SSHD’s decision: a) to refuse to accept that the Claimant’s representations amounted to a fresh asylum/human rights claim per para 353 of the Immigration Rules and/or b) not to exercise her discretion under paragraph 353B to treat the Claimant’s case on an exceptional basis
ii) The SSHD’s decision to set removal directions in respect of the Claimant and to maintain those prior (it is alleged) to any or any proper and lawful consideration of representations. (The Claimant recognises that the order granting permission does not grant permission to challenge the decision to set removal directions in themselves. In addition the decision to set removal directions has long since passed and is now academic. If the claim fails then the SSHD will set new removal directions; if the claim succeeds the SSHD will not seek to remove pending the appeal.)
iii) The SSHD’s decision a) to refuse to accept the Claimant’s representations amounted to a fresh asylum/human rights claim, and b) the failure of the SSHD to exercise her discretion under paragraph 353B to treat the Claimant’s case on an exceptional basis.
Judges:
Clive Heaton QC HHJ
Citations:
[2014] EWHC 3378 (Admin)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Immigration
Updated: 15 April 2022; Ref: scu.537733