Age assessments play a critical role in determining whether an asylum seeker is a child or an adult, which in turn affects the level of support and protection they receive. However, these assessments can often be contentious and subject to legal challenges. This blog post explores the reasons why age assessments can be challenged in the UK, backed by recent case law examples from the past 12 months.
1. Procedural Fairness
One of the most common grounds for challenging age assessments is a lack of procedural fairness. The law requires that age assessments be conducted in a manner that is fair and just. This includes giving the individual an opportunity to present their case, being informed of the reasons for the assessment, and having access to legal representation.
Case Example: In R (HAM) v. Kent County Council (2023), the High Court found that the local authority’s age assessment was procedurally unfair. The claimant was not given adequate opportunity to respond to the conclusions of the assessment, and there were concerns about the objectivity of the social workers involved. As a result, the court quashed the assessment and ordered a new one to be conducted.
2. Reliability of Methods Used
Challenges often arise when the methods used to assess age are questioned. For example, physical appearance and demeanour are often used to estimate age, but these can be highly subjective and inaccurate. The introduction of scientific methods such as dental x-rays and MRI scans has also been controversial, with critics arguing that these methods are not always reliable and can lead to incorrect conclusions.
Case Example: In R (MA and HT) v. Home Office (2024), the use of dental x-rays to determine the age of two asylum seekers was successfully challenged. The court held that the use of these methods without considering the significant margin of error and the individual’s specific circumstances was unlawful. The case highlighted the need for a more holistic approach to age assessment, taking into account the individual's background and physical and psychological development.
3. Inadequate Consideration of Evidence
Another common reason for challenging age assessments is the failure to adequately consider all the evidence presented. This can include documentary evidence, witness statements, and expert opinions. Courts have emphasised the importance of a comprehensive review of all available evidence before arriving at a conclusion.
Case Example: In R (AAM) v. Birmingham City Council (2023), the court found that the local authority had failed to properly consider the claimant’s birth certificate and other documents that supported his claim to be a minor. The assessment was deemed flawed, and the court ordered a re-assessment with a direction to give due weight to all evidence presented.
4. Bias and Prejudice
Age assessments can also be challenged on the grounds of bias or prejudice, particularly when there is evidence that the decision-makers may have been influenced by stereotypes or preconceived notions about the individual’s background or ethnicity. Courts are vigilant in ensuring that assessments are made impartially and based solely on the evidence.
Case Example: In R (YK) v. London Borough of Hillingdon (2023), the court found that the age assessment was influenced by racial and cultural biases. The assessors had made assumptions about the claimant’s age based on his ethnicity, which was deemed unlawful. The court ordered a new assessment to be carried out by an independent body.
5. Failure to Follow Legal Precedents
Challenging an age assessment may also be grounded in the argument that the assessment did not follow established legal precedents. Courts have set out guidelines for how age assessments should be conducted, and failure to adhere to these can render an assessment unlawful.
Case Example: In R (BA) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (2024), the court ruled that the age assessment had not followed the procedural safeguards established in previous case law, particularly the requirements for a “Merton-compliant” assessment. The failure to comply with these legal standards led to the assessment being quashed.
Conclusion
Age assessments are a crucial part of the asylum process, but they are also fraught with potential pitfalls. Challenges often arise due to issues of procedural fairness, reliability of methods, inadequate consideration of evidence, bias, and failure to follow legal precedents. The recent cases mentioned above illustrate the ongoing scrutiny that age assessments are under in the UK legal system.
For those requiring expert assistance with age assessments, including challenging or defending such assessments, visit Independent Migrant Services for professional and independent support tailored to the needs of asylum seekers and migrants.
Comments