header-logo header-logo

01 June 2017
Issue: 7748 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Military base refugees win case

Court of Appeal: Home Secretary acted unlawfully in refusing to consider UK entry

The Home Secretary acted unlawfully in refusing to consider entry to the UK for a group of refugee families on the British Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus, the Court of Appeal has held.

The six claimants were among 75 individuals who washed ashore on the military base in 1998 after the boat they were travelling in foundered off the Cypriot coast. While the Home Secretary accepted the claimants were refugees within the meaning of the 1951 Refugee Convention, she disputed their right to move to the UK on the basis they had no strong ties to the UK and there were ‘no reasons for treating them exceptionally’. Moreover, she argued, neither the 1951 Convention nor the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights applied to military bases. She said the Home Office had made arrangements with the Republic of Cyprus for the families.

The claimants countered that the 1951 Convention did apply to the military base in Cyprus, therefore the families should be allowed to move to the UK.

The court unanimously held, in R (Bashir & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 397, that the Refugee Convention applies directly to the military base by virtue of the earlier extension of the Refugee Convention to the colony of Cyprus in 1957. It ordered the Home Secretary to urgently reconsider the refusal of entry.

Delivering the lead judgment, Lord Justice Irwin said: ‘The secretary of state must take the decision once more but on the basis that the Refugee Convention applies directly and the UK owes direct obligations to the claimants by operation of public international law.

‘In my judgment the outcome of that decision must take into account the history but cannot be determined by this court merely by re-analysing the historic evidence.’

Tessa Gregory, partner at Leigh Day, who acted for the refugees, said: ‘Our clients have been in legal limbo for 18 years living in wholly unacceptable conditions on a British military base. We hope the UK government will not seek to pursue further costly legal proceedings and will face up to its responsibilities.’

Issue: 7748 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll