Shire v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 13 Oct 2003

The claimant, a Somali woman, had arrived at Gatwick Airport from Yemen at 10.30 pm on 29 August 1999 and not claimed asylum until 31 August (the intervening day being a bank holiday). Her reason for not claiming at Gatwick was that she was accompanied by an agent who unsurprisingly was concerned that nothing be done which might occasion his arrest for facilitation. The claimant had lodged her appeal with the court of appeal but then sought to change the grounds upon which the appeal was based. The claimant did not forewarn the court.
Held: ‘In a situation of that nature it is highly desirable that those who act on behalf of the appellant should write to the court and to the other party indicating the proposed nature of the changed case which is to be advanced, seeking the directions of the court as to whether the matter should be dealt with at the beginning of the hearing of the appeal or by directions being given by the court prior to the hearing of the appeal. ‘ In this case, the question was what was meant by the obligation on an asylum applicant to make a claim ‘on his arrival’. Here she acted under the direction of an agent who arranged her immigration, and must be assumed to be under that agent’s direction. The claim had not been made on her arrival.

Judges:

The Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales, (The Lord Woolf Of Barnes) Lord Justice Chadwick And Lord Justice Buxton

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1465, Times 30-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 28-Nov-2007
The claimant said that the 1987 Regulations were invalid, in making invalid any claim for benefits by an asylum seeker who had not made his application exactly upon entry to the UK.
Held: The appeals were allowed. Section 11 of the 1971 Act is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187113