The client was represented by Steven Galliver-Andrew of Garden Court Chambers, instructed by Marina Khan of Duncan Lewis Solicitors.
The below content has been reproduced from a Duncan Lewis press release.
In a significant legal victory, a client who was unlawfully detained for a prolonged period of nine months, has been awarded £85,000 in damages.
Unlawful Detention and the Home Office’s Failures
The client’s detention began in May 2022 and continued for several months, despite being unlawful. During this period, he was vulnerable with ongoing asylum claims and outstanding representations. His case became further complicated due to potential trafficking issues and previous experiences of torture, which the Home Office failed to properly assess.
One of the key issues in this case was the Home Office’s attempt to deport the client to Iraq on 31 May 2022 without appropriate documentation. Nevertheless, the Home Office pressed ahead with deportation efforts, even though the removal directions had been cancelled, compounding the wrongful nature of the detention.
Failure to Conduct Proper Assessments
Moreover, the Home Office’s mishandling of the client’s case went beyond deportation attempts. They failed to conduct the necessary assessments required by Rule 34 of the Detention Centre Rules 2001, which mandates that a detained individual be assessed for any vulnerabilities, including the risk of trafficking or harm, within 24 hours of arrival at a detention centre.
The client had made a bail application to be released from detention, which was refused. The Tribunal, however, had been misled by incorrect information from the Home Office, which stated that there were no barriers to the client’s removal. The Home Office had erroneously stated that the client had no release address, despite his previous address being available to him.
Delays and Mismanagement in Asylum Claim
During our client’s detention, the Home Office acknowledged that the client’s asylum claim was still pending and might even attract a right to appeal, yet no immediate action was taken for his release. A Rule 35 report was finally prepared, seven months after he was detained. The report raised significant concerns about the client’s past torture and trafficking experiences, which were corroborated by visible scarring on his body.
Despite these clear indications of vulnerability, the Home Office failed to respond to the Rule 35 report within the stipulated time frame, nor did they conduct an appropriate assessment of whether continued detention was proportionate under the law. Following this, the legal team sent an urgent Letter Before Claim to the Home Office, which went unanswered. As a result, judicial review proceedings were initiated and the client was subsequently released.
Settlement
The legal proceedings ultimately led to the client’s release. The case was then transferred to the County Court for the determination of damages related to the unlawful detention. After a series of Part 36 settlement offers and continued negotiations, the case was resolved with a significant settlement of £85,000.
For the client, the settlement offers some measure of justice, but it also serves as a stark reminder of the systemic issues that continue to affect those detained by immigration authorities.
