On the 24th May 2007 Mr Justice Walker ordered that the case of Ndenga Lukombo (High Court Ref : CO/8351/2006) be re-listed until after the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal gives its decision in the country guidance case BK (Appeal Number AA/04958/2006) and that Mr Lukombo shall not be removed from the UK while his case is pending.

Click here for a copy of the court order.

A similar approach has been taken on a number of other high court cases within the last few months.

The country guidance case BK has now been adjourned, part heard, until the 17th September 2007. A decision is not thought likely to be given until a couple of months later.

If any DR Congo refused asylum seekers are asked to leave the UK or detained and given removal directions prior to the decision in the BK case, they should seek legal advice to see if they may be able to make a similar challenge to that made by Mr Lukombo.

The Home Office, Treasury solicitors and Asylum and Immigration Tribunal have been given extensive evidence for the BK case, including new leading expert reports, which many feel demonstrates a real risk of torture if refused asylum seekers are returned to DR Congo. It is felt that this new evidence should not be dismissed by simply referring to any current country guidance case as the evidence in the BK case is strong and post dates that of the standard evidence normally put forward by the Home Office.

A number of solicitors have said to NCADC that if the information in the BK case were to be put forward in any future cases where a refused asylum seeker faces removal to the DR Congo, then, depending on the facts of the individual case, according to the immigration rules it might have to be recognised as a fresh claim on the basis that it is material evidence that post dates the present country guidance case and considered as a whole stands a reasonable prospect of success.

The greatest indication that the current standard evidence put forward by the Home Office in their county report and existing Country Guidance cases is dangerously in need of review might be said to be the fact that the Asylum and immigration Tribunal themselves have decided to assess this new evidence and provide a new country guidance on the issue of whether refused asylum seekers are removed to the DR Congo.

If any DR Congo refused asylum seekers are given removal directions, it might be possible for each individual case to be challenged by way of further representations to the Home Office on the basis of the BK case and the evidence which the Home Office is in possession of. It may be possible to legally challenge any rejection by the Home Office of any such further representations by way of judicial review and injunction as the evidence in the BK case is thought to pass the fresh claim test.

It is understood that the barristers involved on the case are Chris Jacobs of 36 Bedford Row and Jessica Franses of 10 Kings Bench Walk. The Solicitors in the case are Biscoes solicitors and have instructed Trott & Gentry Solicitors to act as their London Agents.

Please note that NCADC is not qualified to give immigration advice. If any DR Congo refused asylum seekers are detained and given removal directions, we suggest they seek legal advice immediately.

Source for this Message:
Ndenga Lukombo
High Court
Asylum and Immigration Tribunal