The UK High Court has delivered a damning blow to the Home Office, branding its treatment of asylum seekers as ‘unlawful’ in a landmark judicial review. The case centred on the government’s aggressive policy to clear asylum seekers out of hotel accommodation.
A ‘Seriously Flawed’ and Rushed Policy
Mr Justice Linden ruled that the Home Office’s practice of issuing eviction notices with as little as seven days' notice was fundamentally unfair. The policy, a key part of former Home Secretary Suella Braverman’s agenda, was found to be ‘seriously flawed’ and implemented with a ‘disappointing lack of clarity’.
The judge highlighted a ‘serious failing’ in the system, noting that the process gave vulnerable individuals no meaningful opportunity to explain their circumstances or challenge the decision before being made homeless.
A Victory for Humanity and Due Process
The case was brought forward by the Refugee Council and a former asylum seeker, known as CB, who faced destitution after being evicted. The ruling was hailed as a critical victory for basic human rights and administrative justice.
Enver Solomon, CEO of the Refugee Council, stated: “This judgment is a vindication of the rights of incredibly vulnerable people... The government must now ensure a fair and humane process.”
Political Fallout and Home Office Response
Labour’s Shadow Immigration Minister, Angela Eagle, seized on the ruling, accusing the government of ‘incompetence and callousness’. She stated it exposed a department more focused on headline-grabbing than on effective, lawful governance.
A Home Office spokesperson acknowledged the judgment, stating they would carefully consider the findings and their next steps, while reiterating their commitment to reducing the use of costly hotels for asylum accommodation.
This ruling forces a major recalibration of the Home Office’s approach, underscoring that the pursuit of policy targets cannot override legal obligations and basic decency towards those seeking sanctuary.
