Court of Appeal rules that challenges to terrorism-related “Temporary Exclusion Orders” engage Article 6 ECHR but limits scope of review


The Court of Appeal has handed down judgment today in QX v Secretary of State for the Home Department. This is the first time the Court of Appeal has ruled in a case relating to the regime of Temporary Exclusion Orders (TEOs) introduced under the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. Under the Act the Home Secretary has the power to impose TEOs on certain categories of person who are suspected of terrorism-related activity outside the UK. TEOs restrict the ability of individuals to enter and leave the UK and can result in the imposition of various other “obligations”; in QX’s case, these included obligations to report every day to a police station and to attend weekly appointments with a mentor and with a theologian.

Overturning the decision of Farbey J in the High Court, the Court of Appeal finds that QX’s challenge to the imposition of his TEO engages Article 6 ECHR, meaning that he is entitled to “AF No 3” disclosure. The Court of Appeal also rules on the nature of the review to be carried out by courts hearing such challenges and finds that the High Court does not have the power to order a party to produce a witness it does not wish to call and in respect of whom no witness statement has been served.

Dan Squires KC and Darryl Hutcheon were instructed on behalf of QX.

Useful link(s)