In the matter of an application by JR295 for Judicial Review (Respondent)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0084

Parties

Appellant(s)

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Respondent(s)

JR295

Issue

Did the Court of Appeal err in granting a stay of SSHD’s appeal?

Facts

The Respondents, JR295 and NIHRC, brought separate judicial review challenges against specific provisions of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 (“IMA”). In May 2024, a High Court judge found in favour of the Respondents that various IMA provisions: (i) were incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998; and/or (ii) breached Article 2 of the Windsor Framework (“A2 WF”). A2 WF requires the UK to ensure that there is no diminution of the rights under the Belfast-Good Friday Agreement as a result of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. Therefore, a result of point (ii), the judge ordered that the IMA provisions breaching A2 WF be disapplied (in Northern Ireland only). The Appellant, SSHD, sought to appeal the decision on point (ii). Before the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland (“CA”) could hear the SSHD’s appeal, however, there were two developments. First, the CA gave judgment in a separate case that also involved A2 WF issues: Re Dillon [2024] NICA 59. Second, the government introduced the Border Security Asylum and Immigration Bill (“the Bill”) to Parliament. If enacted, the Bill would repeal all of the impugned IMA provisions. Following these developments, the Respondents applied to the CA to stay SSHD’s appeal, on the basis that it was now academic (at least until Re Dillon’s application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was decided). After hearing that application, the CA granted the stay. SSHD now appeals to the Supreme Court against the CA’s grant of the stay (i.e. this is not an appeal on the underlying substantive issues, it challenges the stay only).

Date of issue

15 May 2025

Case origin

PTA

Linked cases

Back to top