High Court rules in favour of unaccompanied asylum-seeker against Local Authority

On 16 April 2025, His Honour Judge Dight CBE handed down judgement in the case of MIA v Dorset Council [2025] EWHC 970 AC-2024-LON-002655, in favour of the Claimant (MIA) against the Defendant Local Authority (Dorset Council). 

The case concerned a Judicial Review challenge against Dorset Council, for their failure to undertake a re-assessment of the Claimant's age, despite the presentation of new evidence. 

MIA, an unaccompanied asylum seeker from Afghanistan, was initially assessed as a child and supported accordingly. Following a later adverse age assessment by Dorset Council, he was moved to adult accommodation. MIA obtained a Taskira (Afghan identity document) following the adverse age assessment, supported by expert reports confirming its authenticity but despite this, Dorset Council refused to re-assess his age.

MIA challenged two refusal decisions through Judicial Review proceedings and argued the council unlawfully applied the wrong legal test, ignored relevant new evidence, and departed from established guidance (ADCS). The Defendant accepted the Taskira was genuine but claimed it lacked evidential reliability and no re-assessment was legally required.

The Court found Dorset Council’s refusal to re-assess irrational and flawed, and the council asked the wrong question by focusing on whether the document was conclusive, rather than whether it might lead to a significantly different outcome. The Court mandated the council to conduct a new assessment.

MIA was represented by Agata Patyna  instructed by Rahul Kanani of Osbornes Law, supervised by Edward Taylor.

Antonia Benfield, as well as Imogen Proud from Monckton Chambers, assisted the Claimant in early stages of proceedings. David Carter acted for the Local Authority.

For more information about the case, please read Osbornes Law article here.