Direct link Share on

The High Court has held that Article 6 ECHR does not apply to claims concerning decisions not to provide consular assistance, because such decisions are in exercise of a "public authority prerogative".

The underlying proceedings concern a British national (C3) who is alleged to have travelled to Syria in 2014 and aligned with ISIL, and who is now located in Al-Roj camp in North-East Syria, where she is being held together with her three youngest children. C3 requested consular assistance from the Foreign Secretary to repatriate her and her children to the UK.

C3 claimed that she was entitled to a higher level of disclosure in these proceedings, pursuant to Article 6 ECHR and in accordance with the principles set out in Home Secretary v AF (No 3) [2010] 2 AC 269 (HL). Jay J held that Article 6 did not apply, because consular assistance decisions are in exercise of a public authority prerogative, including because they are discretionary and engage considerations applicable to the conduct of foreign relations; and because neither a citizen's right to abode nor to a passport are civil rights which engage Article 6 ([49]-[55]).

The substantive hearing in these proceedings is currently listed for February 2026.

Jason Pobjoy KC and Grant Kynaston appeared for the Foreign Secretary on the disclosure application.

The judgment can be found here.

+44 (0)207 5831770

Clerks

Staff