In an important judgment, the Court of Appeal has clarified the approach by the home secretary when certifying asylum and human rights claims as “clearly unfounded”.
The home secretary rejected two Albanian citizens’ refugee status and human rights applications and certified both applications as “clearly unfounded” claims under s 94(3) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
Ruling in FR & Anor (Albania), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 605, the court quashed the certificates.
Delivering the lead judgment, Lord Justice Beatson emphasised “the importance of giving separate consideration to the decision on an application for asylum, where the secretary of state decides whether it should succeed, and the decision on certification, where she has to decide whether the application is ‘clearly unfounded’ so that it is bound to fail and ought to be certified”.
Naim Hasani, consultant solicitor at Duncan Lewis, who acted for FR, says the decision “obliges the secretary of state for the home department to review her current policy/practice on how she approaches refusal and certification of asylum and human rights claims.
“This can only be a positive development for many refugees who are often victims of badly constructed decisions by the home secretary.”
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
