Streaming Asylum Claims and Appeals
Under the current appeals system it can take years to conclude an asylum appeal. As of May 2020, 32% of asylum appeals lodged in 2019 and 9% of appeals lodged in 2018 did not have a known outcome. 7
	Currently, if a person’s asylum claim is refused, they have an automatic right to appeal the decision to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber). Nearly everyone who has their asylum claim rejected chooses to make this appeal. If the decision is upheld the person claiming asylum has a further route of appeal to the Upper Tribunal. If at that point they are not satisfied with the result, a decision can in some circumstances be appealed again at the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. It is possible for a person, having exhausted all the above processes, to then make a new claim, in effect, starting the whole appeal process again.
	A judicial review may also be brought against a Home Office decision at various points in the process of someone seeking to prevent their removal from the United Kingdom or when refused a right to remain in the United Kingdom. In 2019, there were 8,000 judicial reviews against Home Office immigration and asylum decisions. 8 Judges concluded 6,063 cases on paper, of which 90% were dismissed or refused, with around 17% being deemed by the judge to be "Totally Without Merit". 9 These figures illustrate that a large percentage of cases taken to judicial review are not well-founded, taking up judicial and administrative time and delaying legitimate cases.
	The measures outlined in this Act seek to streamline the appeals process by introducing an expanded ‘one-stop’ process to ensure that asylum and human rights claims, referrals as potential victims of modern slavery and any other protection matters are made and considered together, ahead of any appeal hearing. Improved access to legal advice is intended to help people raise such matters as early as possible and avoid last minute and repeat issues being raised.
	This Act aims to reduce the volume of sequential claims, appeals or legal action, while ensuring access to justice and upholding the rule of law. The envisioned outcome is to ensure swift access to justice, stop parallel and sequential litigation on different grounds and ensure an effective and efficient judicial system. A key part of this is the introduction of a Priority Removal Notice. People who are liable for removal and can be subject to an enforced return within a reasonable timescale will, on receipt of this, be able to access legal advice for a fixed number of hours, funded by legal aid, which is non-means and non-merits tested, on any aspect of their immigration status and claim(s) for remaining in the UK, including modern slavery matters. This will require recipients to bring forward any such grounds within a set time period. If a person raises a late claim, without good reason, outside of this period and that claim is refused, any right of appeal will be direct to the Upper Tribunal rather than the First-tier Tribunal. This will ensure that any appeals following a late claim will be dealt with in the most expeditious manner possible, while maintaining judicial oversight from the Tribunal.
	The introduction of a new accelerated appeal process will ensure that cases which are deemed to be unfounded, or new claims which are raised late, are dealt with swiftly