News & Resources

Robin Tam QC and Emily Wilsdon represented the Home Secretary in a challenge to a curfew

9th November 2017

A judgment was handed down by Lewis J on 30 October 2017 following a three-day hearing in the Administrative Court. The judicial review claim challenged the imposition of a curfew by the Home Secretary on a foreign national offender.

Following a three-day hearing in the Administrative Court, Lewis J found that a curfew imposed on a foreign national offender was unlawful as it was imposed pursuant to an unpublished policy about curfews, and because the Claimant was not afforded an opportunity to make representations prior to its imposition. The policy concerned the re-imposition of curfews that had had to be lifted following the Court of Appeal’s decision in R (Gedi) v Home Secretary [2016] EWCA Civ 409, [2016] 4 WLR 93 (in which Robin Tam QC had also represented the Home Secretary).

However, the Court rejected a number of other arguments advanced by the Claimant. The Court’s conclusions included the following:

There was no abuse of power or departure from an earlier decision of the First-tier Tribunal to grant bail to the Claimant (which had not specifically considered whether or not to impose a curfew).

The bail power contained in paragraph 22 of Schedule 2 of the Immigration Act 1971 is not limited to preventing absconding, but could be used to prevent offending.

The Secretary of State’s use of ‘nominal’ re-detention for a very short period in order to grant bail including a curfew was not detention which was covered by Chapter 55 of the Enforcement Instructions and Guidance, and respected the FTT’s decision that the Claimant should be released from detention on appropriate conditions.

As a matter of principle, a 7-hour curfew would not necessarily be more onerous than two periods of 2 hours each; and a substantive curfew of a number of hours each day would not necessarily be disproportionate or unjustified, intended as it is to ensure that the offender keeps regular structured hours and returns home on a daily basis, which can deter absconding and reduce the risk of re-offending.

Judgment was handed down on Monday 30 October 2017.

Robin Tam QC and Emily Wilsdon, along with Mathew Gullick at 3PB, were instructed by the GLD on behalf of the Secretary of State.

Related Barristers

Robin Tam QC

Robin Tam QC
Year of Call: 1986
Year of Silk: 2006

Emily Wilsdon

Emily Wilsdon
Year of Call: 2011

Close X

TEMPLE GARDEN CHAMBERS is a market leading set with recognised excellence in a myriad of practice areas with awarded leaders in twelve specialist areas. TGC has the privilege of being well placed in the Temple and The Hague with superb facilities.

Currently consisting of 17 silks and 60 juniors with outstanding leadership and a long established clerking team acknowledged for their exceptional client services and business development, we are keen to expand upon our key areas.

To accommodate the growth in our core practice areas we are inviting applications from established practitioners and/or teams to further enhance our excellent reputation in the following fields:

• Personal Injury & Clinical Negligence
• Inquests & Inquiries
• Health & Safety
• Costs & Litigation Funding

TGC is widely recognised for its friendly ethos and its commitment to Equality & Diversity and Wellbeing. We are especially keen to encourage applications from underrepresented groups at the bar – women, people with disabilities, those from ethnic minority groups and members of the LGBTQ+ community.

Applications will be treated with the strictest confidence and should be addressed to the Head of Chambers, Keith Morton QC

In advance of any formal application both Keith Morton QC and Dean Norton (Senior Clerk) would be delighted to have a confidential discussion. To arrange a meeting please contact Dean on 020 7842 8641 or