Home Office found to be unlawfully withholding payments to pregnant women and children under 3 in hotel accommodation


Photo by Sasar on iStock

Mr Justice Swift has found that the Home Office is required to make additional weekly payments to pregnant women and children under 3 to meet their basic nutritional needs whilst living in hotel accommodation on asylum support.

The Court accepted the Claimants’ argument that regulation 10A of the Asylum Support Regulations 2000 requires these additional payments to be made as a matter of statutory interpretation. Swift J held that it was not open to the Secretary of State to do otherwise.

Moreover, the Court recognised that these payments are intended, and required, to meet children’s additional needs for healthy food and the nutritional and health needs of pregnant women.

Further, the Court held that, even if the Secretary of State had been entitled to provide for these needs via the food at hotels rather than by making payments, the hotel food did not meet the nutritional needs of the Claimants in this case and was therefore insufficient.

The Claimants in this case, HA and SXK, were represented by Zoe Leventhal KC and Ben Amunwa, instructed by Sasha Rozansky and Ugo Hayter from Deighton Pierce Glynn.

Useful link(s)