is unlawful and unreasonable and one which no reasonable

Secretary of State could have reached and the warrant is

therefore void."

As is frequently the most practical course, we heard the

application for leave to apply for judicial review on the basis

that if the court decided that leave should be granted, the

argument in support of the application for leave would also be

regarded as the argument for the substantive hearing. Having

heard part of the submissions advanced by Mr. Thomas QC, who

appeared on behalf of Mr. Osman, we were satisfied that Mr. Osman

had a case which justified his being granted leave and this was

announced during the course of the hearing.

Although it is possible to draw a distinction between an

application which is made by an asylum seeker and someone in Mr.

Osman's situation, I consider we should nonetheless adopt the

same approach to that which was laid down by the House of Lords

in Bugdaycay v. The Home Secretary [1987] 1 A.C. 514, by Lord

7

Share This Page