Privy Council refuses Commissioner permission to appeal in Diego Garcia detention case (10 July 2026)

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council refused the Commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory permission to appeal in R (VT and Others) v Commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory ("VT") on July 9.

The case concerned a judicial review brought by 12 Tamil asylum seekers who became stranded on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the British Indian Ocean Territory, between October 2021 and December 2024. During this period, they were held in a fenced compound, initially guarded by military personnel and later by private security officers. Following a visit to the island in November 2023, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) described the conditions as amounting to "arbitrary detention".

The claimants argued that the conditions in which they were held amounted to false imprisonment at common law. They sought declaratory relief together with writs of habeas corpus.

On 16 December 2024, Margaret Obi JSC allowed the claimants' applications for judicial review, granting declarations that all of the claimants had been falsely imprisoned from the date of their arrival on Diego Garcia until their departure on 2 December 2024, with the exception of KP, whose false imprisonment ended when he was sentenced to immediate custody on 16 October 2024, and VT. As part of the proceedings, Obi JSC conducted a site visit to Diego Garcia, enabling the Court to assess the detention facilities and conditions first-hand.

The Commissioner appealed Obi JSC’s decision to the Court of Appeal.  Following a four day hearing, on 16 December 2025 the BIOT Court of Appeal dismissed the Commissioner’s appeal on all grounds. As such, the findings of the BIOT Supreme Court were preserved.

After this decision, the Commissioner sought permission to appeal the decision to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The BIOT Court of Appeal refused permission on 9 February 2026, highlighting the following points:

1. That the Commissioner’s criticism that the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of BIOT did not take into account the circumstances of Diego Garcia as a military base was “simply not arguable” and that “If it is the Commissioner’s view that what he considers a proper assessment of those unique circumstances should inevitably have led both BIOT courts to find in his favour (and, at times, that did appear to be his position) thereby excluding the operation of fundamental principles of law which protect the liberty of the individual, together with years of associated jurisprudence at the highest level, then, frankly, that view is manifestly without merit.”
2. That the Commissioner’s arguments had two fatal flaws, namely that (1) the grounds were merely no more than an expression of disagreement with the outcome of the appeal and (2) the grounds fail to identify any proper errors of law in the Court of Appeal’s judgment.

The Commissioner renewed his application to the Judicial Committee, who on 8 July 2026 refused permission to appeal on the basis that the application was “wholly devoid of merit”.

Ben Nelson, Solicitor at Duncan Lewis, said of the decision:

“The Privy Council’s refusal of permission in this case draws a welcome close to a long and difficult chapter in our clients’ lives. Our clients were detained for years in awful conditions, and through the course of lengthy and difficult litigation over a period of years repeatedly had to deal with the government’s position that, in fact, the conditions they were kept in did not constitute detention at all. This position has now been firmly rejected by the Privy Council, allowing our clients to finally secure the justice they spent years seeking.”

RG, JS and KP were represented by Toufique Hossain, Simon Robinson, Gina Skandari, Ben Nelson and Kristen Allison, with Joseph Brian Murphy and Sugani Suganthan.

Counsel instructed for RG and JS were Chris Buttler KC and Jack Boswell of Matrix Chambers. Counsel instructed for KP were Helen Law KC, of Matrix Chambers and Sarah Dobbie, of Doughty Street Chambers.

The other Claimants were represented by Leigh Day, JCWI, Wilson Solicitors LLP, and Bindmans LLP.

About Duncan Lewis Solicitors

Duncan Lewis Solicitors is one of the UK's leading providers of legal aid services and is recognised nationally for its expertise in immigration, asylum, public law and human rights. The firm's specialist lawyers regularly represent vulnerable individuals in complex and high-profile cases involving refugee protection, trafficking, detention, nationality disputes and judicial review challenges.