An asylum seeker who was found to be destitute and had failed in his application was entitled to restricted support under the section. The respondent implemented a policy restricting the restriction on the use of the power to those who had some physical impediment preventing movement. The applicant had not been evicted, but had had no financial support for eight weeks.
Held: The policy of not informing potential beneficiaries of the section of its availability was unlawful. There was no justification for relying upon an applicant’s legal representatives to tell him. Such applicants were ex hypothesi destitute, but it was not for the court to say what support should be provided.
Stanley Burnton J said: ‘These considerations lead me to conclude that it is not open to the Home Secretary to decide to refrain from making known his hard cases policy. On principle a policy such as that should be made known to those who may need to avail themselves of it. Leaving aside contexts such as national security, it is in general inconsistent with the constitutional imperative that statute law be made known for the government to withhold information about its policy relating to the exercise of a power conferred by statute.’
Judges:
Stanley Burton J
Citations:
[2003] EWHC 2273 (Admin), Times 13-Oct-2003
Links:
Statutes:
Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 95(3)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Reilly and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 30-Oct-2013
The Secretary of State appealed against the decision in favour of Ms Reilly and Mr Wilson, that the 2011 Regulations, made under section 17A of the 1995 Act, did not comply with the requirements of that section, and (ii) a cross-appeal brought by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Benefits, Immigration
Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.186715