Issuu on Google+

Click here to reset form

Judicial Review

Click here to print form

In the High Court of Justice Administrative Court

Claim Form

Notes for guidance are available which explain how to complete the judicial review claim form. Please read them carefully before you complete the form. For Court use only

Seal

Administrative Court Reference No. Date filed SECTION 1 Details of the claimant(s) and defendant(s) st Defendant

Claimant(s) name and address(es) name

name

Commissioner of Police for the City of London

Declan Heavey address

Defendant’s or (where known) Defendant’s solicitors’ address to which documents should be sent.

Suite 101 254 Pentonville Road London N1 9JY Telephone no.

name

Commissioner Adrian Leppard address

Fax no.

078 8043 7681

Wood Street Police Station 37 Wood Street London EC2P 2NQ

E-mail address

dheavey@gmail.com

Claimant’s or claimant’s solicitors’ address to which documents should be sent.

Fax no.

Telephone no.

020 7601 2455

name

E-mail address

Adrian.Leppard@city-of-london.pnn.police.uk address

2nd Defendant name

Home Secretary Telephone no.

Fax no.

Defendant’s or (where known) Defendant’s solicitors’ address to which documents should be sent.

E-mail address

name

Rt Hon Theresa May MP Claimant’s Counsel’s details

address

name

Home Office 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF

address

Fax no.

Telephone no.

020 7035 4848

020 7035 4745

E-mail address Telephone no.

public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Fax no.

E-mail address

N461 Judicial review claim form (04.09)

 of 6

© Crown copyright 2009


SECTION 2 Details of other interested parties Include name and address and, if appropriate, details of DX, telephone or fax numbers and e-mail name

name

address

address

Telephone no.

Fax no.

E-mail address

Fax no.

Telephone no. E-mail address

SECTION 3 Details of the decision to be judicially reviewed Decision:

City of London Police’s decision not to ask Broadway to engage with him and his wife in relation to their welfare and access to the charity's service for supporting clients to find alternative accommodation. Date of decision:

10 July 2013

Name and address of the court, tribunal, person or body who made the decision to be reviewed. name

address

Professional Standards Directorate Bishopsgate Police Station London EC2M 4NP

Detective Chief Inspector Dave Service on behalf of Commissioner Adrian Leppard

SECTION 4 Permission to proceed with a claim for judicial review I am seeking permission to proceed with my claim for Judicial Review. Is this application being made under the terms of Section 18 Practice Direction 54 (Challenging removal)?

Yes

No

Are you making any other applications? If Yes, complete Section 7.

Yes

No

Is the claimant in receipt of a Community Legal Service Fund (CLSF) certificate?

Yes

No

Are you claiming exceptional urgency, or do you need this application determined within a certain time scale? If Yes, complete Form N463 and file this with your application.

Yes

No

Have you complied with the pre-action protocol? If No, give reasons for non-compliance in the box below.

Have you issued this claim in the region with which you have the closest connection? (Give any additional reasons for wanting it to be dealt with in this region in the box below). If No, give reasons in the box below.

 of 6

Yes

No

✔ Yes

No


Does the claim include any issues arising from the Human Rights Act 1998? If Yes, state the articles which you contend have been breached in the box below.

✔ Yes

No

Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life): "There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

SECTION 5 Detailed statement of grounds ✔

set out below

attached

1. The claimant and his wife have been sleeping rough on a derelict St Alphage Highwalk at Salters' Hall in the City of London since 14 April 2013, having been evicted from their flat on 14 March through no fault of their own. The claimant has repeatedly requested that the City of London Police ask Broadway to engage with him and his wife in relation to their welfare and access to the charity's service for supporting clients to find alternative accommodation. The first named defendant refused to do so by email dated 10 July 2013. 2. On 21 July 2013 the claimant complained to the second named defendant that, following an alleged complaint (not from the Salters' Company), two City of London Police officers told the claimant and his wife to move on and threatened them with a hosing by street cleaners later that night. On 29 July the claimant and his wife found their sleeping pitch drowned in heavy duty deep cleaning product, on 1 August drenched with diesel, and on 17 August were again threatened by a police officer with street cleaners; all well-documented on the internet, with photographic evidence. 3. The first named defendant has not replied to the claimant's pre-action letter dated 2 August 2013. The claimant seeks to apply for permission to apply for judicial review on the ground of irrationality or unreasonableness. SECTION 6 Details of remedy (including any interim remedy) being sought The claimant seeks a mandatory order that the City of London Police ask Broadway to engage with him and his wife in relation to their welfare and access to the charity's service for supporting clients to find alternative accommodation.

SECTION 7 Other applications I wish to make an application for:-

 of 6


SECTION 8 Statement of facts relied on

1. The claimant and his wife have been sleeping rough on a derelict St Alphage Highwalk at Salters' Hall in the City of London since 14 April 2013, having been evicted from their flat on 14 March (see Supporting Documents ("SD"), p. 1). According to Circuit Court papers, they were only evicted because their then (live-in) landlady's ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, needed the flat for somebody with a mental illness (see SD, p. 4). Circuit Judge Cryan refused the claimant permission to appeal to the Circuit Court against a decision by the District Court to refuse a stay of eviction on the ground that such an appeal had no prospect of success. Belinda McKenzie housed for a couple of years (until 2007) M15 whistleblower David Shayler, who subsequently declared himself to be the Messiah, became a squatter, and was ridiculed in the press and media for changing his name to Delores Kane (see SD, p. 2). 2. The claimant has written directly to the first named defendant on four occasions (19 May, 3, 14, and 21 June) and to the second named defendant on four occasions (16, 22 June, 10 and 21 July), requesting that the City of London Police ask Broadway Homelessness and Support ("Broadway") to engage with him and his wife in relation to their welfare and access to their service for supporting clients to find alternative accommodation. The decision not to do so was communicated to the claimant by email dated 10 July, signed by Detective Chief Inspector Dave Service, Professional Standards Directorate, Bishopsgate Police Station (see SD, p. 28). Responding to an email addressed to the second named defendant dated 16 June (see SD, pp. 25-27), a copy of which was sent to the first named defendant, the decision states as follows: "I regret the unfortunate situation that you find yourself in but it is not part of our role and we have no mandate to become involved." In the paragraph preceding this quote, the decision email points out that it is part of the role of the police service "to engage with homeless people and assist them where necessary as part of the community of the City of London", and therefore this decision is wrong. 3. The claimant has repeatedly communicated to both defendants that he and his wife have been experiencing an accommodation blockade through surveillance for over a year, as documented both in Circuit Court papers relating to possession of the said flat (see SD, pp. 5-7) and in the claimant's recent open complaint to the United Nations over electronic and other surveillance by the Security Service (MI5) and/or Government Communications Headquarters (see SD, pp. 10-23). Moreover, the claimant and his wife have been denied assistance by Haringey Council, Brighton and Hove Council and Islington Council because they are not deemed to be a 'priority need', e.g. they do not have children, the claimant's wife is not pregnant, they are not vulnerable as a result of age (young or old), disability, mental health issues, etc. 4. On 3 June 2013 the claimant showed Sgts Keith Redman-Henry and Nina Houghton from the City of London Police's Community Policing team a written commitment from a benefactor in America to pay the deposit on a flat for him and one months' rent up front. The claimant also has a perfect credit reference from Experian, a faultless Housing Benefit track record, and a good reference letter from his previous tenancy (see SD, p. 3). Nonetheless, on 20 July, following an alleged complaint (not from Salters' Company), two City of London Police officers told the claimant and his wife to move on and threatened them with a hosing by street cleaners later that night (see SD, p. 31). On 29 July the claimant and his wife found their sleeping pitch covered in heavy duty deep cleaning product (see SD, p. 32), on 1 August drenched with diesel (see SD, p. 33), and on 17 August were again threatened by a police officer with street cleaners (see SD, p. 34). 5. In March 2013 Broadway CEO Howard Sinclair wrote in The Guardian that there are occasions when Broadway has accommodated rough sleepers straight from the streets (see SD, pp. 8-9). In addition to the Mayor of London providing Broadway with £5 million to end rough sleeping in the capital, the charity has received £10 million from London and Quadrant Housing Trust, alongside the support of three other trusts, to accommodate people in London for whom there has been no other option, according to Mr Sinclair in the same article. 6. The first named defendant has not replied to the claimant's pre-action letter dated 2 August 2013 (see SD, pp. 29-30). The claimant requests permission to apply for judicial review on the ground of irrationality or unreasonableness. He believes that it is unreasonable for the City of London Police to refuse to ask Broadway to support him and his wife to access the private rented sector, whilst at the same time putting them under threat of hosings by street cleaners. He also fails to understand why the accommodation safety net provided by legislation does not extend to him and his wife.

Statement of Truth I believe (The claimant believes) that the facts stated in this claim form are true. Full name

Declan Jude Heavey

Name of claimant’s solicitor’s firm Signed

Position or office held (if signing on behalf of firm or company)

Claimant (’s solicitor)

 of 6


SECTION 9 Supporting documents If you do not have a document that you intend to use to support your claim, identify it, give the date when you expect it to be available and give reasons why it is not currently available in the box below. Please tick the papers you are filing with this claim form and any you will be filing later. Statement of grounds

included

attached

Statement of the facts relied on

included

attached

Application to extend the time limit for filing the claim form

included

attached

Application for directions

included

attached

Any written evidence in support of the claim or application to extend time Where the claim for judicial review relates to a decision of a court or tribunal, an approved copy of the reasons for reaching that decision ✔

Copies of any documents on which the claimant proposes to rely A copy of the legal aid or CSLF certificate (if legally represented) Copies of any relevant statutory material A list of essential documents for advance reading by the court (with page references to the passages relied upon)

If Section 18 Practice Direction 54 applies, please tick the relevant box(es) below to indicate which papers you are filing with this claim form: a copy of the removal directions and the decision to which the application relates

included

attached

a copy of the documents served with the removal directions including any documents which contains the Immigration and Nationality Directorate’s factual summary of the case

included

attached

a detailed statement of the grounds

included

attached

 of 6


Reasons why you have not supplied a document and date when you expect it to be available:-

Signed

Claimant (’s Solicitor)

Click here to print form  of 6


Judicial Review application