Bringing Down the Detained Fast-Track
The Detained Fast-Track process unfairly detained asylum-seekers while their claims were being considered under an accelerated timetable. We fought this procedure until it was brought down.
In JM & Ors  we challenged the legality of this process on the basis that it created an unacceptable risk of unfairness to vulnerable or potentially vulnerable individuals. The High Court agreed, and the Secretary of State conceded that the process as a whole created a risk of failure to identify those whose claims were unsuitable for a quick decision within the Detained Fast-Track process. (See Garden Court Briefing Note)
Our case of Alvi & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department  established the important principle that anyone who had their appeal determined under the ultra vires 2014 Fast-Track Rules can apply to the president of the First-Tier Tribunal to have their appeal decision set aside and reheard.
In TN (Vietnam) & US (Pakistan) the High Court declared that the 2005 Fast Track Rules were also ultra vires.
In the case of YA, the Home Office completely failed to identify our client, from Chad, as a potential victim of torture and had detained him under the Detained Fast-Track system, despite having evidence from the Helen Bamber Foundation that he was a victim of torture. The Home Office defended the case, despite the case being brought after JM & Ors.
In the event, the High Court held, “without hesitation, in light of the concession and declaration in JM that it was unlawful not to release the Claimant within one day of receipt of the letter [from the Helen Bamber Foundation].”
In the media: