Asylum Seeker in High Court battle with WBC claims to still be a child

She was assessed as age 26 by the Home Office on her arrival into the UK.

Brought to the attention of the High Courts back in May of this year, the claimant, a female who cannot be named, has sought representation to fight a battle against WBC in determining her date of birth – which she claims to be September 12, 2006 – making her 17 years old.

The individual, who journeyed from her home country of Eritrea in East Africa via boat last year to seek refuge in the UK, is appealing the age assessment given by the Home Office and by representatives of the council which provided her estimated date of birth as March 12, 1998.

This would make her 26 years old and an adult in the eyes of the law.

However, she, along with legal representatives, has contested this claim, further stating that she should be allowed access to support under the Children Act 1989.

Providing a final judgement on the case, honourable judge Justice Sweeting highlighted what the Children Act states should be provided and accessible to those who qualify for it.

He said: “The Act imposes obligations on local authorities in England to support children within their area, including providing accommodation.

“A child who was once looked after remains entitled to certain types of support even after becoming an adult (as a “former looked after child”).

“This support may include a personal adviser, a pathway plan, and financial assistance for education and training.

"‘If a child is wrongly assessed as an adult and does not receive support before turning 18, the local authority has a discretion to treat them as a “former looked after child."

Furthermore, when a person, like the claimant in question, seeks support under the Children Act and their true age is uncertain, the local authority must then conduct an age assessment.

This assessment was conducted by social workers on behalf of the council through a Tigrinya interpreter on September 29, 2023.

However, the claimant requested a judicial review of this, with the result agreeing with the Home Office’s initial age assessment of 26 years old.

Judge Sweeting continued: “She also applied for interim relief because her mental state had deteriorated due to her living conditions and, it is said, lack of support from the Defendant [Warrington Borough Council].

“The interim relief sought was that the [council] provides her with accommodation and other support, appropriate for a child, pending the outcome of the claim.”

She has described being “scared and uncomfortable" living in her current accommodation, a hotel in Warrington, where she lives with other adult asylum seekers and said that this is causing her "extreme anxiety".

Backing this up, Rebecca Merry, a senior caseworker at Care4Calais who was in touch with the claimant, gave details of her expressions of suicidal intent on “multiple occasions”.

Judge Sweeting added: “Simon Beech, a manager at Serco, the Home Office's accommodation provider, described the claimant’s concerning behaviours, including damaging property, drawing childlike pictures, and isolating herself in her room.”

And a report provided by a doctor assessed the female as showing signs of “depression, anxiety, and potential PTSD”.

“She concludes that the claimant’s accommodation and inability to access education are contributing factors to her distress and suicidal ideation,” the judge explained.

“The evidence therefore paints a picture of a young woman struggling with severe mental health challenges stemming, in part at least, from her presence in adult accommodation.”

The Home Office gave an initial age assessment of the claimant when she first entered the UK last year (Image: PA) Giving some background on the claimant, the judge stated that the female “sought asylum in the UK after arriving by small boat on August 21, 2023” and provided “conflicting birth dates, either September 3, 2006, or September 1, 2006”.

Following her arrival into the UK She was provided with hotel accommodation by the Home Office in a hotel in Warrington where she currently lives.

The Home Office staff assessed her as visibly over 18, due to factors including her “appearance and demeanour, as well as doubts about the personal history she provided”.

It was heard by the courts that to back up her claims that she was still a child, the individual provided the council with copies of school reports which gave evidence that she would have been 11 years old in the 2018 academic year.

A baptism certificate was also provided which stated her date of birth to be September 2, 2006.

But this was met with disapproval by the Home Office with an official, Andrew Martin commenting: “It’s unlikely the NDFU would be able to say much about either documents as they are not official government produced documents.

“I have seen a fair few cases where Eritreans produce baptism and / or school certificates as proof of age rather than something that would actually be able to confirm their age with certainty.”

When she met with the council to discuss the issue further, she confirmed that had never owned a passport and that her visa documents, which she used originally to enter Germany with, became “soaked as she was waiting to cross the Channel in Dunkirk”.

The Claimant subsequently contacted Migrant Help and Care4Calais for assistance and instructed Duncan Lewis solicitors in mid-February 2024 to help her battle the decision of the age assessment.

One of WBC’s defences for her claims was that “the Claimant continues to choose not to ask her mother for a witness statement or supporting documentation of her age” as well as the fact she “refused to provide the council with contact details for her mother”.

Judge Sweeting added: “She now has access to funds but continues not to contact her mother or grandmother notwithstanding that any financial impediment has been removed.

“The case was, it was said, an unusual one because the claimant had travelled alone and stayed in Germany for some time before travelling on to the UK.”

Concluding the ruling of the case, honourable judge Justice Sweeting said: “There is plainly a serious issue to be tried as to the Claimant’s age.

“The balance of convenience involves weighing: (a) The potential harm if the claimant is treated as an adult but is later found to be a child. (b) The potential harm to the local authority if an interim order is made but the claimant is later found to be an adult.

There is clear evidence of potential harm to the claimant. The claimant resides in adult asylum-seeker accommodation, an environment unsuitable for children.

“Her mental vulnerability and deteriorating mental state are well evidenced. If she is not recognised as a child in need before she turns 18, she may lose statutory entitlements to support as a former looked-after child, potentially leaving her with inadequate support.

“The Defendant [Warrington Borough Council] has not presented any evidence of specific safeguarding risks if the claimant is treated as a child while awaiting the final determination of her age nor is there any evidence of resource constraints.

“I conclude that the potential harm to the claimant if relief is denied, in particular further deterioration of her mental health and loss of statutory support significantly outweigh any prejudice to the defendant and therefore grant the interim relief sought.”

A further decision and outcome determining the client’s age is yet to be ruled, with further enquiries pending.