England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
KING'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
SITTING IN LEEDS

		13th March 2024

MR JUSTICE FORDHAM:

1. This is a judicial determination on the papers, but where it is, in my judgment, appropriate to give reasons by way of a short judgment. The claim for judicial review was filed in London on 8 December 2023. London is the Administrative Court venue for the South-East region. A minded to transfer order (MTTO) for transfer to the Administrative Court in Leeds was made on 29 January 2024. Leeds is the Administrative Court venue for the North-East region. The Form N461 (8 December 2023) recorded that the Claimant was resident in Middlesbrough (NE3). It also recorded that he had instructed solicitors and solicitor advocates based in London (EC4). It answered "yes" to the question: "Have you issued this claim in the region with which the claim is most closely connected?" As it turns out, that was correct.
2. The SSHD does not oppose transfer to Leeds. The Claimant's representatives filed submissions (2 February 2024) which emphasised that: (a) the impugned decisions were issued from London; (b) the Claimant's lawyers are in London and have acted for him since he was detained; and (c) the Claimant would not be required to attend any hearing. I was not persuaded by these submissions.
3. However, I considered it appropriate to allow an opportunity to assist me further, because of the way immigration detention featured in the case. My clerk emailed (1 March 2024) to ask for clarification as to the Claimant's current whereabouts and as to where the Claimant had been detained when the impugned decisions (8 December and 20 December 2023) were made. The information that came back confirmed that (a) he is now resident in Birmingham (B13) and (b) he had been detained at Yarlswood Detention Centre (MK44) when the impugned decisions were made. Milton Keynes is in the South-East Circuit. I am satisfied that "the claim" is "most closely connected" with the South-East region. This case is all about the legality of decisions to refuse and certify an asylum claim (8 December 2023) and to set removal directions (12 December 2023). The notices were issued to the Claimant while at Yarlswood. It makes geographical sense, in those circumstances, that he enlisted lawyers in the South-East. I am satisfied, from the information which I requested, that the claim should remain in London. I decline to transfer it, to Leeds or to Birmingham.

11.3.24