CA-2025-002338 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1264

CTK is from Eritrea. He was born on 2 January 2000. He claims to have fled to Ethiopia with his mother in 2003. He left Ethiopia in October 2023 with the help of an agent. He claims to have been treated badly in Sudan and in Libya. He travelled to Italy by boat in April 2025. He stayed there for a month and then went to France.

CTK arrived in the United Kingdom by boat on 12 August 2025. He claimed asylum when he arrived. He was detained. He had an asylum screening interview on 13 August 2025. He had an Amharic interpreter in his interview. He was asked if he had any medical issues and said that he had a sore shoulder because he had been hit by “a small vehicle”’ about four years earlier. He was asked if he had been exploited, and said “No”. According to the record of that interview, he was given an explanation of what was meant by that question.

He was asked to describe his journey to the United Kingdom. He said that he had walked to Sudan with the help of an agent. He was taken to Libya, where he stayed for a year. He supported himself by working as a porter carrying bricks. He was usually paid for this, but sometimes he was not paid. He went to Italy in a small boat. He stayed with the Red Cross for a month. He then walked over the mountains into France. He stayed for three months, supported by a charity. The trip to the United Kingdom was paid for by his mother. He thought that she had paid 1400 dollars for it (that is, just over £1000). He was asked why he had not claimed asylum elsewhere. He said that he had seen lots of people sleeping in the streets. He said he could not return because “There is no support in them countries”.

The Secretary of State then took steps to remove him to France. We will briefly describe part of the mechanism for that later in this judgment. On 14 August 2025 the Secretary of State issued CTK with a “notice of intent”. This told CTK that he might be removed to France. On 15 August the Secretary of State made a readmission request to France. The French authorities accepted that on 4 September 2025. In the meantime, on 19 and 27 August 2025, CTK attended appointments with two different firms of duty solicitors, TNA Solicitors and Brit Solicitors. Ms Grange told us that they made no representations on his behalf. On 5 September 2025 the Secretary of State served two decisions on CTK. She decided that CTK’s asylum claim was inadmissible: she decided that it would have been reasonable for him to have claimed asylum in France. She refused and certified CTK’s claim that his removal to France would breach his Convention rights. It appears that she deduced the nature of his claims from what CTK had said in his asylum screening interview. She said that, if he wanted to seek legal advice, he should do so then (“decision 1”). She also served a notice of liability to removal to France (“decision 2”).

On 8 September 2025 the Secretary of State told CTK that directions had been set for his removal on a flight to France at 9am on 17 September 2025 (“decision 3”).

The next day CTK went to the duty advice surgery with his current solicitors, Duncan Lewis. He instructed them to represent him on 12 September 2025. They raised a trafficking claim with the Competent Authority on 13 September 2025. They sent further representations to the Secretary of State on 14 September 2025 and sent a pre-action protocol letter the next day. Mr Robinson is a solicitor who works for Duncan Lewis. It appears from emails exhibited to Mr Robinson’s witness statement that the Competent Authority interviewed CTK on 14 September. Duncan Lewis asked the Competent Authority to send them a copy of that interview record.

The Competent Authority sent Duncan Lewis an email at 13.31 on 15 September. The email was sent to the email address of Ms Abida Begum at Duncan Lewis. It was headed “Request for Further Information”. A response was required by “16/09/2025”. The email said that “The Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority needs more information to help them reach a Reasonable Grounds decision on the Competent Authority referral for [CTK]”. It asked three questions: first, for “more detail of both exploitations in Ethiopia and Libya”; secondly, “Why is [CTK] reporting this now?”; and thirdly, “Are you able to provide additional documents that could support the Competent Authority referral?” Ms Begum replied soon afterwards, at 14.48 on 15 September 2025. She said that CTK “requires an interpreter and we are finding it difficult to source one at such short notice”. She added, “In any event, we find your request unreasonable, expecting us to provide information within such a short timescale”. On 16 September 2025, under cover of an email timed at 13.37, Ms Begum nevertheless served on the Competent Authority a witness statement from CTK dated 15 September 2025, and gave very brief answers to the three questions in the Competent Authority’s email of 15 September 2025.