District Judge Duncan Adam considers the new appeal procedure for asylum cases brought into effect by the 39th CPR update

The 39th update to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) relates to the new procedure for applications to the High Court under section 103A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, inserted into that Act by the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004.


The update is dry and dusty, despite the dramatic nature of asylum and immigration work. The amendments took effect from 4 April 2005.


The Act has swept aside the old two-stage immigration authorities appeal system. There is now but one appeal from an immigration or asylum decision to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT). The former adjudicators are now members of the AIT.


A new section III to part 54 of the CPR enables an appellant to apply to the High Court for an order that the AIT reconsiders its decision on an appeal, on the grounds that the AIT made an error of law.


What about decisions that were pending on 4 April 2005? The amending statutory instrument provides that section III of part 54 applies to the applications, while modifying the existing wording in part 54 so that references to the AIT are to be read as referring to the adjudicator who decided the appeal and those to the AIT decision as referring to that of an adjudicator.


A new practice direction 54B provides that applications for review under section 103A are to be dealt with in the Administrative Court, although transitional cases are to be filtered through consideration by a member of the AIT. Additionally, applications in respect of fast-track cases that are not filtered are to be filed at an address specified in the AIT's determination.


Part III sets out the procedure. There are no surprises in CPR 54.29 as to the documents required to be filed, their contents and those who are to be served.


The times for making an application under section 103A are to be found in section 103A(3). CPR 54.30 provides that an application to extend the time limit may be made in the application notice, that it should set out the grounds and be supported by written evidence verified by a statement of truth.


How does the court determine the application? A single judge considers it without a hearing. Only evidence submitted to the AIT is considered, unless the judge directs otherwise. He may dismiss the application, remit it to the AIT or refer the appeal to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal may restore the application to the court, in which case the latter may not refer the appeal to the Court of Appeal again. The court's decision is final.


CPR 54.34 deals with the service of the court's order, and 54.35 ensures that, generally, there will be no orders as to costs of an application under section 103A.


District Judge Duncan Adam sits at Bath County Court and was a part-time immigration adjudicator sitting at Taylor House from 1997 until 2004