R (Binomugisha) v Southwark LBC [2006] EWHC 2254 (Admin), [2006] All ER (D) 83 (Sep)
FRESH ASYLUM CLAIMS
The decision of the High Court in R (Binomugisha) v Southwark LBC makes it difficult for a local social services authority to refuse to accommodate a failed asylum seeker who makes what purports to be a fresh asylum or human rights claim to remain in the UK if:
(i) the individual is one of the more vulnerable individuals who, as asylum seekers, were
accommodated by local authorities; and
(ii) the purported fresh claim is not manifestly unfounded.
At a more general level, this case and the following case illustrate a reluctance on the part of the courts to assist the government in the implementation of immigration decisions.
The facts
Binomugisha, a Ugandan national, arrived in the UK aged 15 in October 2002. He entered the UK on a false passport and, accordingly, was (and is) in the UK in breach of the immigration laws. In
October 2003, aged 16, he claimed asylum. He was referred to Southwark London Borough Council, which decided that, as a child with no parent to care for
