Home office Napier Barracks Court ruling

The High Court has ruled that the housing of "Asylum Seekers" in Napier Barracks was Unlawful and breached their Human Rights.


If the conditions at Napier were that bad that Asylum Seekers have had a ruling in the High Court in their favour, what about the soldiers who were housed in that very same barracks then.. Or do our soldiers "Human Rights" fall below that of an Asylum Seekers?
 

Cruthin1967

Old-Salt
Missing the point. Since the MOD passed Napier Barracks to the Home Office, the place was run by an organisation called Clearsprings. They did nothing to renovate the buildings, crammed the asylum seekers in (25% Covid positive) and hardly cleaned the place. Bloody shambles.

Not Belsen. But a corporation doing SFA and getting paid for it by the tax payer.
 

exsniffer

Old-Salt
IRRC In 1997/8 a barracks in East Anglia possibly Oakington was handed over to the home office to house illegal immigrants,, The army unit ,either the Cheshires, or the Royal Anglians moved out, before the illegals were allowed to move in several hundred thousand pounds worth of improvements and repairs were carried out
 

syrup

LE
Missing the point. Since the MOD passed Napier Barracks to the Home Office, the place was run by an organisation called Clearsprings. They did nothing to renovate the buildings, crammed the asylum seekers in (25% Covid positive) and hardly cleaned the place. Bloody shambles.

Not Belsen. But a corporation doing SFA and getting paid for it by the tax payer.


Can we not expect Migrants (Not asylum seekers) to keep the place clean then?
 
The High Court has ruled that the housing of "Asylum Seekers" in Napier Barracks was Unlawful and breached their Human Rights.


If the conditions at Napier were that bad that Asylum Seekers have had a ruling in the High Court in their favour, what about the soldiers who were housed in that very same barracks then.. Or do our soldiers "Human Rights" fall below that of an Asylum Seekers?
Who funded this case? Surely asylum seekers don't have the wedge for it.
 

syrup

LE
Who funded this case? Surely asylum seekers don't have the wedge for it.


From the article

Sounds like it was public funded as they are lawyers specialising in this sort of stuff.

Plus the claimants should be able to fund it themselves after the payout.

They might get enough for a flight home

The Home Office and the six men have yet to agree on damages and what declarations are required.
 
Criminals that carry out illegal acts (such as entering a country ILLEGALLY) should be imprisoned and/or deported. No ifs or buts or Supreme Court cases! :mad:
 

Snowy.

War Hero
All migrants should be housed in tent campsites in the Welsh valleys....

Build a bloody big wall around Wales from Chepstow up to Chester..

Nobody like the Welsh anyway so no harm...
 

Boris_Johnson

ADC
Moderator
DirtyBAT
Missing the point. Since the MOD passed Napier Barracks to the Home Office, the place was run by an organisation called Clearsprings. They did nothing to renovate the buildings, crammed the asylum seekers in (25% Covid positive) and hardly cleaned the place. Bloody shambles.

Not Belsen. But a corporation doing SFA and getting paid for it by the tax payer.

Once again the government failing us by awarding a contract to a totally useless company, knowing full well it will be spun as a "good enough for our 'eroes" dit...
 
Who funded this case? Surely asylum see
kers don't have the wedge for it.
These claims are almost exclusively bought by lawyers who make their money by trawling for clients who can bring a claim under the Human Rights Act, and its associated laws. Having found one they then apply for Legal Aid on behalf of their new client to fund the action. Legal Aid is provided by the Government out of taxation, so the short answer is that you are paying for it.

The beauty of the system from the lawyer's perspective is that should the case fail the claimant does not have to pay the costs of the case or Government's legal fees - unlike in civil cases.

Whenever you hear someone describe themselves as a 'human rights lawyer' invariably they are a lawyer who cannot make a living in the commercial arena and is reliant on Legal Aid via the state for their income. Unkind people might suggest they are no better than middle class benefit scroungers.

Priti Patel for all her faults is trying end this scam by making lawyers who bring cases of dubious merit pay the costs when the case fails.

 
Last edited:

Blogg

LE
Missing the point. Since the MOD passed Napier Barracks to the Home Office, the place was run by an organisation called Clearsprings. They did nothing to renovate the buildings, crammed the asylum seekers in (25% Covid positive) and hardly cleaned the place. Bloody shambles.

Not Belsen. But a corporation doing SFA and getting paid for it by the tax payer.

Correct. Result of classic omnishambles should not have surprised anyone

 

Boris_Johnson

ADC
Moderator
DirtyBAT
Criminals that carry out illegal acts (such as entering a country ILLEGALLY) should be imprisoned and/or deported. No ifs or buts or Supreme Court cases! :mad:

Crinimals, yes. Desperate people fleeing war? Nope...

Then you have the Catch 22 of the asylum system. You have to apply once you arrive in the UK. For many, they simply don't have the means to do this, so they are exploited by criminal gangs who make money out of endlessly ferrying them over on dangerous channel crossings.

The biggest issue of all however, is those who have absolutely no right to be here, travelling from countries not at war, (but are mainly poor because their government is a bit crap and uses any international aid to buy their leaders even newer Mercedes and even higher walls for their fortresses)... Using every trick in the book to claim, appeal, reclaim, abscond etc causing massive implications, both resources and financial.

This ultimately causes more mayhem, longer processing times and greater periods of detention from those genuine applicants who just need to get out of harms way and reorganise their lives for a bit.

The asylum process needs a massive overhaul, which fast tracks the genuine cases and deters the players. And it needs it quickly.

Trouble is, these so-called "do-gooder" lawyers ironically make the system far worse for the genuine asylum seekers by seemingly impeding the government at every stage.
 
Oh what a surprise! Tom Hickman was on the field today.

Blackstone Chambers is known for its ‘unparalleled strength‘ in ‘the relationship between EU/international protections and UK domestic legislation’. Barristers at the set also have extensive experience in asylum claims, refugee law and cases concerning deportation and citizenship. High profile cases included a challenge to the deprivation of Shamima Begum’s civil liberties, led by Tom Hickman QC
 
Trouble is, these so-called "do-gooder" lawyers ironically make the system far worse for the genuine asylum seekers by seemingly impeding the government at every stage.

Cough Cough

Very little money to be made in genuine asylum seekers.

All the money is be made in Illegal's.
 
Top