The High Court has refused an applicant’s request for an interlocutory injunction to prevent her deportation while her judicial review proceedings are pending.
In a judgment delivered on 3 February 2020, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys said the ruling dealt only with the injunction application, not the substantive challenge to immigration decisions. The court had adjourned the substantive matter after the applicant sought permission to amend her statement of grounds.
The proceedings challenge the refusal of an application to revoke a deportation order and an amended order made in September 2019. The original deportation order was made on 17 February 2017. The applicant also wishes to seek an extension of time to challenge that original order.
The judgment records that the applicant’s asylum and subsidiary protection claims, and later immigration applications, had been refused. The court noted that earlier protection and refoulement complaints had been rejected. It also said the 2017 deportation order had not yet been challenged in the proceedings before it.
The judge found that the applicant had an arguable case for the purposes of interim relief, but said that did not weigh in her favour beyond clearing that threshold. He considered the public interest in orderly implementation of measures that appeared valid, the consequences of deportation, and the previous protection findings. He concluded that the balance of justice was firmly against granting an injunction.
The court refused the injunction. It also gave the applicant liberty, on a de bene esse basis, to file an amended statement of grounds seeking an extension of time to challenge the 2017 order. The judge reserved the time issue for the substantive hearing and said the permission did not prejudge it.