Case No. UKUT-00094-(IAC)

[2006] EWCA Civ 817 as “a very extreme case on its facts”. 90. I reject Ms Harrison’s submission that the High Court in Rostami , and the Court of Appeal in Negassi , are restricted to their facts. This applicant is subject to a range of SIAC bail conditions which impose significant restrictions on his liberty; to the extent there is an interference with his private life Article 8 rights due to those restrictions, that interference is caused by the SIAC bail conditions imposed in consequence to the applicant’s national security risk, rather than the terms of the Work Policy, or the February 2020 decision. So much is clear from paragraph 29 of the applicant’s 4 February 2020 application for permission to work: “[C6] is in a unique situation. He has been under restrictive bail conditions for the last five years that have seriously restricted his movements and his ability to occupy his time…” 91. The only example of Article 8 being found to be engaged by a decision concerning an asylum seekers’ access to the labour market is