ITN Solicitors represent QX in a challenge to the imposition of a Temporary Exclusion Order (“TEO”). TEOs are administrative measures, which the Home Secretary may impose on UK citizens who are outside the UK in order to control their return to the UK and impose obligations on them upon their return. In 2018, the Secretary of State imposed a TEO on QX based on an allegation that QX was involved in terrorism related activity in Syria.
The Claimant applied to the Court for a review of the Secretary of State’s decision to impose the TEO, as well as the obligations he was subject to under the TEO. The Claimant has consistently denied he was involved in terrorism related activity in Syria, however almost all of the case against him has been withheld from him under the court’s Closed Material Procedure. QX sought disclosure of the detail of the allegations so that he could respond to them and argued that Article 6 ECHR applied to the challenge, and therefore he was entitled to at least a gist of the allegations against him, so he could respond to them.
In a judgment handed down on 5 August 2024 the Supreme Court determined that Article 6 ECHR applies to a challenge to the imposition of a terrorism-related Temporary Exclusion Order (“TEO”) where the TEO imposes obligations interfering with an individual’s civil rights.
QX is represented by William Kenyon and Gabrielle Law at ITN Solicitors and counsel Dan Squires KC, Darryl Hutcheon and Rosalind Comyn at Matrix Chambers.
The judgment can be found here: QX (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) - The Supreme Court