The court considered the withdrawal of benefits for asylum seekers once their application had been determined. The court could see no significant difference between withdrawing benefits once the decision is made, even if the decision and/or the reasons have not yet been communicated to the applicant, and withdrawing them while the applicant pursues an appeal which in law he has a right to do. The purpose of the l996 Regulations was to deprive asylum seekers of benefits once a decision had been made by the Secretary of State. The only qualification was the requirement that the decision should be recorded. An asylum seeker was to be afforded benefits while the matter was being decided by the Secretary of State but not thereafter.
Citations:
[1997] EWHC Admin 247
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Salem v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 6-Mar-1998
The Secretary of State having decided against an application for asylum could direct non-payment of benefits although he would hear representations.
Held: Regulation 70(3A)(b)(i) defines a date by reference to the recording by the Secretary of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration, Benefits
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.137192
