The Court of Appeal has delivered a damning verdict against the Home Office, branding its three-year detention of a British grandmother as unlawful and demonstrating a 'shocking and unacceptable' failure to safeguard her welfare.
Dame Victoria Sharp and Lord Justice Underhill presiding over the case condemned the department's handling of the woman, known only as 'C3', who was held in immigration removal centres despite being a British citizen. The judges found officials displayed a 'wholesale disregard for the rule of law' and their duties towards a vulnerable individual.
A Case of Systemic Failure
The ruling exposes critical failures within the Home Office's detention processes:
- The woman was detained for over three years despite clear evidence of her British citizenship
- Officials ignored multiple legal representations and medical evidence of her vulnerability
- The department failed to conduct proper reviews of her detention status
- There was a complete absence of proper record-keeping and case management
Political Reaction and Demands for Accountability
Labour MP Angela Eagle, who raised the case in Parliament, described the treatment of C3 as 'a disgrace' and called for immediate reforms to prevent similar injustices. The judgment has sparked renewed criticism of the Home Office's culture and operational practices, with demands for greater transparency and accountability.
This landmark ruling follows a pattern of criticism against the Home Office's detention policies and adds to growing concerns about the department's approach to vulnerable individuals within the immigration system.
