High Court rule Home Office and Kent County Council acted unlawfully in their treatment of unaccompanied asylum seeking children

Updated 27 July @14:41

A “secret agreement” made by Kent County Council and the Home Secretary to formalise and normalise their treatment of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children was unlawful because it sanctioned a cap on the maximum number of unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) to whom Kent County Council would accept and discharge its Children Act 1989 duties.

Every Child Protected Again Trafficking UK [ECPAT UK], the lead claimant in an application for judicial review, brought the claim on behalf of the thousands of children who have been unlawfully denied statutory protection because of the collective and individual unlawful action taken by Kent County Council and the Home Secretary.

ECPAT UK’s claim in respect of the unlawful conduct of both Kent County Council and the Home Secretary was allowed in its entirety.

[Update] Patricia Durr, CEO of ECPAT UK (Every Child Protected Against Trafficking), said:

“This judgement powerfully reaffirms the primacy of the Children Act 1989 and our child welfare statutory framework which does not allow for children to treated differently because of their immigration status. It remains a child protection scandal that so many of the most vulnerable children remain missing at risk of significant harm as a consequence of these unlawful actions by the Secretary of State and Kent County Council.

Despite the recent passing of the Illegal Migration Act 2023, which will deny unaccompanied children the right to claim asylum, amongst other hugely damaging provisions, this judgement serves as a clear and timely reminder that neither central nor local government departments can depart from the statutory child welfare framework and the duties towards all children under The Children Act 1989.

We will continue to defend the rights of every child in the UK to live free from exploitation and access the care they are entitled to under the law.”

KCC was and is acting unlawfully, in breach of its duties under the Childrens Act 1989, by failing to accommodate, and then look after, all UASC children when notified of their arrival by the Home Office. In ceasing to accept responsibility for some newly arriving UASC children, while continuing to accept other children into its care, Kent CC chose to treat some UASC children differently from and less favourably than other children, because of their status as asylum seekers. This violates a fundamental aspect of the statutory scheme: that a local authority’s duties under the CA 1989 apply to all children, irrespective of immigration status, on the basis of need alone.

Since July 2021, over 5,400 unaccompanied asylum-seeking children have been temporarily accommodated by the Home Office. Some 1,700 were housed at Langfords Hotel in Hove. The remainder were sent to other hotels in Kent, East Sussex, London, Oxfordshire and
Warwickshire. As of 17 July 2023, 218 UAS children were being housed in hotels in Kent and elsewhere

According to data given to Parliament on 3 April 2023, 447 UAS children had by that time gone missing from these hotels, mostly within 72 hours of arrival; and 186 were still missing. At the time of the hearing, 154 were missing. Information provided to the Judge show that most of the missing children are 16 or 17-year olds but they also include 11 children aged 15, a 14-year old and a 12-year old. Neither Kent County Council nor the Home Secretary knows where these children are, or whether they are safe or well. There is evidence before the Judge that some have been persuaded to join gangs seeking to exploit them for criminal purposes.

We wrote about these disappearing children from The Stade Court Hotel in July 2022. And we also wrote about how KCC were profiteering from Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children as well.

The Judge described these children as having “been lost and endangered here, in the United Kingdom. They are not children in care who have run away. They are children who, because of how they came to be here, never entered the care system in the first place and so were never “looked after”. 

However, what one must take into consideration here is the fact that KCC have now become responsible for ALL UASCs children. This a Council which is close to bankruptcy unless it saves £86m. Given this new burden placed upon them, the extra financial strain may well topple KCC.

KCC do not have the social workers. There is little to no extra capacity in the care home system and even though KCC receive money from the Home Office, they do not receive all the money necessary to look after UASCs. So the money must come from KCCs current budgets; which are stretched to breaking point almost.

The Court have passed down their judgment which can be read in full here. The law is the law, yet reality is reality and one fails to understand where KCC will find all the money, the care homes, or even more hotels, necessary to fulfill their duties under the Children’s Act 1989.

Parts of this blog post first appeared on The Doughty Chambers website

At the time of publishing ECPAT UK have been asked for a comment as have KCC, as soon as they issue any statement we will update the blog post

The Shepway Vox Team

Not owned by Hedgefunds or Barons