header-logo header-logo

Brook House inquiry

20 June 2019
Issue: 7845 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Human rights
printer mail-detail
A proposed Home Office investigation into claims of systemic abuse at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre is insufficient, the High Court has held.

Mrs Justice May held that any inquiry must be able to compel the 21 staff from the security firm G4S to give evidence. She said ‘the egregious nature of the breaches’ meant any inquiry into the claims should have these powers. She also ruled that the detainees must be entitled to publicly-funded lawyers since, for justice to be done in ‘any meaningful way’, the detainees ‘must be able to meet their [alleged] abusers on equal terms’. Further, the inquiry must be held in public, she said.

The case was brought by two former detainees, MA and BB, who featured in an undercover BBC Panorama programme on the centre in 2017. The programme revealed staff mocking and assaulting detainees.

Duncan Lewis solicitor Lewis Kett, who represented MA, said the judgment ‘ensures that those officers can be held to account’. He said a full statutory inquiry is now necessary.

Martha Spurrier, Liberty director, said: ‘To even begin to put an end to this inhumanity the government must implement a 28 -time limit on detention.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll