AC-2025-LON-000997 - [2025] EWHC 1970 (Admin)

On 3 February 2025, in light of their successful appeal to the UT, and the Home Secretary’s confirmation that she was minded to grant leave to enter the UK, the claimants made a request to the Defendant for consular assistance to exit Gaza and attend a VAC, noting that they were unable to arrange their own safe travel out of Gaza. On 5 February 2025, an FCDO caseworker made an initial decision refusing to provide consular assistance, on the basis that the claimants fell outside the scope of the EEC and that their circumstances were not sufficiently exceptional to warrant the discretionary provision of consular assistance.

On 12 February 2025, the claimants sent pre-action correspondence to the Foreign Secretary enclosing the UT’s decision and other documentation. On 21 February 2025, the FCDO agreed to reconsider the claimants’ request. On 12 March 2025, Ms Taylor took a second decision on behalf of the Foreign Secretary to refuse the claimants’ request. She had been provided with a “rationale” document, compiled by caseworkers in the FCDO’s Israel/OPTs Consular Cell. This set out the claimants’ circumstances and the policy framework and attached representations by the claimants’ solicitors. It offered two options: refuse the request on the grounds that the claimants fell outside the EEC and there were no exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from the published policies; or allow the request because such exceptional circumstances existed.

Ms Taylor explained her decision-making process in her first witness statementin these proceedings. She refused the request, having determined that: (i) the claimants fell outside the scope of the EEC, and (ii) their circumstances were not sufficiently exceptional, relative to those of other Palestinians in Gaza, to warrant departing from the Foreign Secretary’s established policy. She adopted the reasons associated with the first option above as set out at paras 9-10 of the “rationale” document. These included that:

“b… The family are living in a ‘profoundly dangerous’ situation in Gaza. However, this is likely to apply to the wider population.

c… [S]upport for [Hamas] is far from universal, with a number of significant opposition groups active in Gaza. The opposition to Hamas from within the general population of Gaza is not so rare as to set this family apart from a reasonable proportion of that population. The findings of the UT inasmuch as their links to Fatah and opposition to Hamas do not appear to be so strong or consequential as to draw threats from that group (in a context of widespread reporting of their approach to those who oppose them).

d… [I]nternal displacement; the difficulty in accessing essential items or employment; the ongoing risk to life in the event of renewed hostilities; or the separation from extended family is not exceptional in the Gaza context.

f… [I]t is likely that representations along similar lines to those made in the family’s case could also be made by other individuals who may seek support to leave Gaza in the future. The family’s circumstances are likely to be faced by a significant number of individuals.”