The High Court dismissed two judicial review applications challenging refusals of subsidiary protection, ruling that officials could prepare draft deportation papers before a final decision on a protection claim.
In a judgment delivered on 17 April 2018, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys considered applications brought by S.O.U. (Nigeria) and F.M. (Pakistan). The judgment described both as further challenges related to M.M. v Minister for Justice and Equality.
The applicants argued that regulation 4(5) of the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations 2006 prevented officials from preparing a deportation order proposal before a subsidiary protection claim had been finally decided. The court rejected that interpretation, agreeing with earlier High Court decisions that there was no legal bar to officials doing this preparatory work.
The applicants also argued that spending resources on deportation reasoning before a final refusal created an appearance of bias. The judge said that issue had likewise been addressed in the earlier decisions, which he followed. A legitimate expectation argument was mentioned but was not strongly pressed; the judge considered it to be without substance.
The judgment said preparatory work for different possible outcomes did not bind the Minister or the ultimate decision-maker and could assist efficient public administration. It also rejected any suggestion that subsidiary protection and deportation procedures could not be related procedurally, referring to an earlier High Court decision.
The court dismissed both applications. The judgment does not set out the underlying individual protection decisions or make a new decision on either applicant’s protection claim.