UK - Supreme Court, 28 July 2010, R (on the application of ZO (Somalia) and others (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home department ( (Appellant) [2010] UKSC 36"

Facts:

The issue in this case was whether the minimum standards of the Reception Directive applied to subsequent applications (fresh claims) for asylum.

Both applicants had sought judicial review of decisions of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to refuse them permission to work. They had both lodged submissions which they claimed amounted to fresh claims for asylum in May 2005. The claims had been outstanding for more than a year when they sought judicial review. The Secretary of State for the Home Department appealing against the decision of the Court of Appeal maintained that the Reception Directive did not apply to fresh claims but only initial claims and that the court of Appeal had been wrong to have had regard to  the Qualification. Directive, the Procedures  Directive or the Dublin Regulation, all of which post–dated the Reception Directive. 

Decision & reasoning:

The Court held that the three directives, although issued at different times, had the same aim, of harmonising practice and procedures across Europe and could be properly used together to aid interpretation. Having decided that, they spent little time concluding that ‘reception’ was not restricted to the reception of an initial claim and dismissed the Secretary of State’s appeals.

Outcome:

Secretary of State’s Appeal was dismissed.

Observations/comments:

As the court declined to make a request for an opinion from the European Court of Justice this became a final determination of the matter. The United Kingdom Border Agency (UKBA) then took steps to make it more difficult for applicants to make further submissions. The submissions had to be delivered in person and by appointment. If no appointment slots are available the potential applicant must wait until such time as the UKBA has capacity to receive and process the claim.