News

The High Court has ruled that the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) acted unlawfully in detaining an EU national for six months in a bid to facilitate confiscation proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA). The landmark judgement in R (Nakrasevicius) v SSHD [2024] EWHC 1856 (Admin) provides important guidance on the limits of immigration detention powers when criminal proceedings are ongoing.

The claimant, a Lithuanian national, was detained under immigration powers despite his clear and repeated requests to be returned to Lithuania. The Home Office, however, continued his detention, justifying it on the basis of pending POCA proceedings in the Crown Court.

The High Court found that the Home Office had misused its immigration detention powers by detaining the claimant not for the purposes of removal, but to indirectly support criminal proceedings – an improper and unlawful purpose. The judgement is a rare and significant example of a breach of Hardial Singh principle 1, which states that a person may only be detained for the purposes of deportation or removal.

Duncan Lewis Solicitors brought a judicial review on the claimant’s behalf, arguing that the SSHD had detained the claimant for an improper purpose. The Crown Court has adequate powers to ensure its own proceedings can be effective, and the SSHD has no lawful basis to intervene via immigration detention to assist criminal processes.

The High Court agreed. Interim relief was granted to prevent further detention, and the Court ultimately held that the SSHD’s actions were unlawful.

The case represents an important development in the interpretation of the Hardial Singh principles, confirming that immigration detention must not be used to serve collateral purposes outside the scope of the SSHD’s lawful remit.

The matter now proceeds to the County Court for determination of liability and damages.

Gemma Lynch, Director of Public Law at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, said:

“This judgement is a stark reminder that the Home Office cannot use immigration detention as a tool to bolster criminal proceedings. Our client was ready and willing to return home, yet he was detained for six months purely to allow the POCA proceedings to continue. This case has clarified a crucial legal boundary and strengthened the protections afforded by the Hardial Singh principles. It is a significant victory not only for our client but for others who may find themselves unlawfully caught between two branches of the justice system.”

The claimant was represented by Solicitor Halima Safa Ahmed, Director Gemma Lynch, and Caseworker Madhurra Sivathasan of Duncan Lewis Solicitors, instructing Alex Schymyck of Garden Court Chambers’ Public Law team.

Duncan Lewis Solicitors

Duncan Lewis’ award-winning Public Law team has a broad national practice handling high-profile strategic litigation, consistently advocating for vulnerable individuals in critical areas such as asylum, detention and trafficking. Our experienced team houses a large judicial review practice that specialises in representing claimants on areas of immigration, human rights and civil liberties.