Baraka, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

A renewed application for permission to bring judicial review will be dismissed where the proposed claim is unarguable on the papers. A court need not repeat an existing costs order merely because permission has been renewed. An order made at an earlier stage remains enforceable unless varied or discharged. The court may also record that a claim is totally without merit where its deficiencies justify that conclusion.

The claimant sought permission to challenge the Secretary of State’s decision, communicated on 2 July 2010, not to treat further representations made on 16 June 2010 as a fresh claim. Lindblom J had refused permission on the papers on 26 October 2010. The claimant renewed the application, but did not attend or appear through representatives. The court considered whether the proposed judicial review claim was arguable and addressed the defendant’s request concerning costs.

1. The renewed application for permission to claim judicial review was dismissed. Having read the papers, the court adopted the reasons given by Lindblom J and concluded that the claim was unarguable.
2. The earlier order made by Lindblom J requiring payment of costs in the sum of £480 was not dependent on renewal of the permission application. There was therefore no need to make a further costs order, because the Treasury Solicitor could enforce the existing order.
3. The court additionally recorded that the claim was totally without merit.

The judgment itself describes an earlier procedural decision rather than an appeal:

• High Court (Administrative Court): Lindblom J refused permission on the papers on 26 October 2010. The renewed application was dismissed by the present court.