Asylum seekers win legal challenge over Home Office

Six asylum seekers formerly housed at Napier Barracks have won a legal challenge against the UK government after a High Court judge ruled their accommodation was inadequate.

Six asylum seekers formerly housed at Napier Barracks in Kent have won a legal challenge against the government.
Six asylum seekers formerly housed at Napier Barracks in Kent have won a legal challenge against the government.

The former Army barracks in Kent has been used to house hundreds of asylum seekers since last September, despite the Home Office being warned by Public Health England (PHE) that it was unsuitable.

The men, all said to be survivors of torture or human trafficking, argued that the Home Office unlawfully accommodated people at the “squalid” barracks and conditions there posed “real and immediate risks to life and of ill-treatment.”

Sign up to our Politics newsletter

On Thursday, Mr Justice Linden found that the Home Office had acted unlawfully when deciding the former military camp was adequate to house the men.

He said: “Whether on the basis of the issues of Covid or fire safety taken in isolation, or looking at the cumulative effect of the decision-making about, and the conditions in, the barracks, I do not accept that the accommodation there ensured a standard of living which was adequate for the health of the claimants.”

Read More

Read More
Kenmure Street: Home Office vows to deport men who were freed during failed Glas...

The Home Office has said that “significant improvement works” have taken place at Napier since the six men were housed there between September 2020 and February 2021.

A Home Office spokesperson continued: “It is disappointing that this judgement was reached on the basis of the site prior to the significant improvement works which have taken place in difficult circumstances. Napier will continue to operate and provide safe and secure accommodation.

“We will carefully consider the ruling and our next steps.”

Mr Justice Linden's judgment does not force the barracks to close, however campaigners have reiterated calls for the site to be shut down.

Shadow home secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds called the judgment a "shameful verdict" for the Government and Home Secretary Priti Patel while the SNP’s shadow home secretary, Stuart McDonald MP, said the ruling was “yet another example of how the Tories treat the most vulnerable in society.”

In the ruling, the judge said the overcrowding and risk of Covid-19 infection meant that it was "virtually inevitable that large numbers of residents would contract Covid-19".

Almost 200 people tested positive for coronavirus during an outbreak at the barracks earlier this year, senior Home Office officials told MPs in February.

Mr Justice Linden found the Home Office failed to apply "fundamental aspects" of PHE advice, including not to use dormitory-style accommodation or keep numbers down to six per dormitory, which resulted in the government's failure to ensure an adequate standard of living.

He also said it was unlawful "to depart from the advice of the government body charged with providing advice to the public on Covid safety in such a fundamental way without good reason, and to send the claimants to the barracks when the measures which the defendant herself regarded as appropriate - e.g. transferring asylum seekers from quarantine and in bubbles - were not in place".

The Home Office and the six men will now need to agree on damages and what declarations are required.

A message from the Editor:Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by Coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

If you haven't already, please consider supporting our trusted, fact-checked journalism by taking out a digital subscription.


Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.