The Home Office has settled a judicial review claim which challenged the legality of leaving people’s asylum claims in limbo due to the Inadmissibility Rules. 

Since April 2022, when the Migration and Economic Partnership (MEDP) was entered into between the UK and Rwanda, thousands of people have been left in limbo as they received notices and decisions of ‘inadmissibility’ under the Inadmissibility Rules. 

Under the Inadmissibility Rules, asylum claims may be declared inadmissible and not considered in the UK, if the claimant had a ‘connection’ to a safe third country. The idea is that the Home Office seeks to remove from the UK people who have connections to other countries, instead of considering their claims here. The UK has few removal agreements with other countries, and instead threatened most people on the inadmissibility track with removal to Rwanda. 

However, the Rwanda plan was never initiated – a plane never took off to Rwanda. Instead, thousands of people in the UK asylum system were left in limbo for over two years; their asylum claims could not progress further, and there was nowhere to send them to. 

The legal challenge and victory

In March 2024, a person seeking asylum known as AMX brought a claim for judicial review against the Home Office’s failure to decide whether or not to admit the cohort of cases under the Inadmissibility Rules into the asylum process. The Home Office’s delay in making inadmissibility decisions was also challenged. AMX was represented by Duncan Lewis Solicitors and Landmark Chambers.

On 18 July, the Home Office agreed to settle this case (reaching an agreement instead of going to court). This goes to show how strong AMX’s arguments were. 

A court order confirms the terms of the settlement: the Home Office has agreed to treat AMX, and everyone else in the Rwanda inadmissibility cohort, as having joined the asylum system on the date when they first claimed asylum. 

According to Landmark Chambers, who represented AMX –

“In practice that means that their claims will be dealt with as a priority and, in general and with a view to fairness overall, will be prioritised ahead of any cases where asylum was claimed on a later date.”

This is a welcome victory for the thousands of people who have been burdened by the stress of the nonsensical Inadmissibility Rules, and the threat of the (now scrapped) Rwanda plan hanging over their heads.

We hope that they will now be able to continue with their lives with clarity and in safety, and look forward to the day that the Inadmissibility Rules are abandoned in their entirety.