EK & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rule 17 Withdrawal)
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
Case concerning the application and interpretation of Rule 17 regarding withdrawal of immigration and asylum applications.
What the court decided
On a judicial review where the applicants (EK and others) sought to withdraw their claim under Rule 17 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the Tribunal held that consent to withdraw is not automatic: although the default position is to consent where nothing is to be gained by the case proceeding, the Tribunal retains a broad discretion to refuse consent. It held that "an abuse of the Tribunal's process is a powerful factor for refusing consent to withdraw but given the breadth of the discretion in the Tribunal Rules it would be wrong to treat abuse of process as either a necessary or an exclusive criterion." Finding a substantial public interest in resolving the claim (including concerns about incentivising dangerous child smuggling and clarifying the Article 8 family-reunion position), the Tribunal refused consent to withdraw and went on to dismiss the judicial review claim on the merits, declining to declare the refusal unlawful or to make mandatory admission orders.
Categories
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.