Louise Hooper

Overview

Louise has a strong public law practice and has acted in hundreds of successful claims which ordinarily settle prior to a substantive hearing.  

She has conducted numerous successful judicial reviews of refusals of ILR to victims of domestic violence who did not meet the specific requirements of DV-ILR. She recently argued that the consequence of the Ahsan/Balajigari principles requires an oral hearing in all cases where deception/bad character is relied on as a general ground of refusal under the Immigration Rules.  This case was conceded and ILR granted.

Louise’s legally aided public law experience includes:

• Challenges to state failure to protect vulnerable individuals from harm under articles 3 and 4 ECHR particularly in respect of trafficking matters and detention
• A significant number of challenges relying on article 8 ECHR in respect of private and family life
• Complex trafficking cases challenging reasonable and conclusive grounds decisions and detention
• Challenges to subsistence payments and accommodation and maintenance provisions for victims of trafficking
• Procedural matters including the vires of secondary legislation and policy, fees regulations and immigration rules requirements for ‘valid’ applications
• Certification decisions including the ambit and application of the fresh claim test
• Dublin challenges including the nature and scope of remedies under article 27 remedy and challenges to the technical implementation and interpretation of Dublin III hierarchy criteria including article 17, ensuring that article 8 rights are properly taken into account in Dublin III decisions, technical criteria including time limits and general interpretation issues as between the Convention and the Implementing Directives
• Fresh claims including cases involving historic injustice caused by either the State or former representatives or both

Louise also advises on the Equality Act 2010 and has obtained successful negotiated outcomes for transgender clients.  She has a growing practice in relation to matters relating to privacy and data protection and recently provided training at a chamber’s webinar on the legality of state surveillance using facial recognition technology.

Notable Cases

Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.

Habte v SSHD [2020] EWHC 967 (Admin)
Construction of Article 17(1) Dublin III Regulation.  Permission to appeal sought from Court of Appeal
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/967.html

KA & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department (ending of Kumar arrangements) [2018] UKUT 201 (IAC) (17 September 2018) permission to appeal granted by the Court of Appeal, appeal pending
Concerning the proper construction of Rule 29 Upper Tribunal (Tribunal Procedure) Rules 2008, materially whether there is a deadline for service of an AoS and the consequences of failure to comply and whether the UT acted ultra vires in extending time for service of an AoS from 21 to 42 days in Kumar.
https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2018/201.html

TN(Vietnam) and US(Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Chancellor [2018] EWCA Civ 2838
Established 2005 Fast Track Procedure Rules were ultra vires. Overturned refusal of fresh claim and negative reasonable grounds decision.

CP(Vietnam) v SSHD [2018] EWHC 2122 (Admin)
Breach of article 4 ECHR for failure to follow policy and failing to protect a vulnerable victim of trafficking who went missing following identification and was not re-identified as a victim when he was discovered in a cannabis factory. Unlawful detention on various grounds including misapplication of ‘public order grounds’.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/2122.html

Mutesi v SSHD [2015] EWHC 2467 (Admin)
No requirement of corroboration to establish whether or not a person was a victim of trafficking.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/2467.html

HB(Ethiopia) v SSHD [2006] EWCA Civ 1713
Concerning delay in human rights cases (linked to EB(Kosovo) v SSHD which proceeded to the House of Lords see [2008] UKHL 41).
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/1713.html

Rahman v SSHD [2005] EWCA Civ 1826
In which the Court of Appeal held there was a public law duty on the SSHD in a human rights case to ensure the court could determine the issue at hand by the provision of relevant information; https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/1826.html

R (L) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 25, [2003] 1 WLR 1230
On the introduction of the clearly unfounded certification regime and the failure to publish the relevant legislation.  The Court accepted that there was potential unfairness in the government relying on unpublished legislation recognising ‘It is an aspect of the rule of law that individuals and those advising them, since they will be presumed to know the law, should have access to it in authentic form.’ [25]. https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/25.html

Overview

Louise has a broad range of experience of both clients and case types on all aspects of immigration, citizenship and asylum work, and is very familiar with the domestic and international jurisprudence on the Refugee Convention and other human rights conventions.  Louise is recognised internationally as an expert on sex and gender-based violence claims and LGBTIQ+ issues.  The vast majority of Louise’s work over the past 20 years has involved particularly vulnerable groups of clients often experiencing multiple barriers to accessing justice.

She has strong knowledge of UK citizenship law and EU residence and free movement rights. She also does a significant amount of unlawful detention work.  She is currently examining the potentially discriminatory impact of the use of technology at borders and in other immigration control functions.

She has written or contributed to a number of leading domestic and international publications on international refugee and human rights law and is frequently asked to peer review material written by others. Her publication for the International Commission of Jurists has been used internationally to rewrite guidelines on governmental and judicial practice and procedure in refugee claims based on sexual orientation and gender identity.  She has recently been appointed as the expert to the Migration drafting committee of the Gender Equality Commission of the Council of Europe.

Louise has also assisted a number of private clients in respect of complex immigration, citizenship and asylum issues.

Louise was counsel instructed in HJ(Iran) before the Tribunal in 2008 and before going on sabbatical sought and obtained permission to appeal before the Court of Appeal on the grounds that the Tribunal had misdirected itself in law in finding it was reasonable to expect a person to hide their sexuality to avoid serious harm.  This became one of the ground-breaking refugee law cases of recent times. (see HJ(Iran) v SSHD [2009] EWCA Civ 172.  She is currently instructed in YD(Algeria) v SSHD (UNHCR intervening) where the Court of Appeal will consider whether the life-long social stigma, ostracism and discrimination coupled with a risk of attack and/or arrest in Algeria amounts to either persecution or renders internal relocation unduly harsh.

Notable Cases

Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.

Habte v SSHD [2020] EWHC 967 (Admin)
Construction of Article 17(1) Dublin III Regulation.  Permission to appeal sought from Court of Appeal.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/967.html

KA & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department (ending of Kumar arrangements) [2018] UKUT 201 (IAC) (17 September 2018) permission to appeal granted by the Court of Appeal, appeal pending
Concerning the proper construction of Rule 29 Upper Tribunal (Tribunal Procedure) Rules 2008, materially whether there is a deadline for service of an AoS and the consequences of failure to comply and whether the UT acted ultra vires in extending time for service of an AoS from 21 to 42 days in Kumar.
https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2018/201.html

TN(Vietnam) and US(Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Chancellor [2018] EWCA Civ 2838
Established 2005 Fast Track Procedure Rules were ultra vires. Overturned refusal of fresh claim and negative reasonable grounds decision.

CP(Vietnam) v SSHD [2018] EWHC 2122 (Admin)
Breach of article 4 ECHR for failure to follow policy and failing to protect a vulnerable victim of trafficking who went missing following identification and was not re-identified as a victim when he was discovered in a cannabis factory. Unlawful detention on various grounds including misapplication of ‘public order grounds.’ 
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/2122.html

Mutesi v SSHD [2015] EWHC 2467 (Admin)
No requirement of corroboration to establish whether or not a person was a victim of trafficking.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/2467.html

Ogundimu v SSHD [2013] UKUT 60 (IAC)
Definition of the word ‘ties’ in paragraph 399A of the Immigration Rules.
https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2013/00060_ukut_iac_2013_oo_nigeria.html

HJ (Iran), HT(Cameroon) v SSHD [2009] EWCA Civ 172
Relating to gay men in Iran. One of the groundbreaking refugee law cases of recent times establishing that where "discretion" or "hiding" - here of sexuality - was necessary to avoid serious harm persecution under the Refugee Convention was established. She successfully obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal for HJ prior to going on sabbatical on the grounds that the core arguments of the appellant (many of which succeeded in the House of Lords) were not determined by the Tribunal. She also gave the original advice to Stonewall in respect of the merits of an appeal to the Tribunal for HT.  Tribunal determination in HJ here: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIAT/2008/00044.html

HB(Ethiopia) v SSHD [2006] EWCA Civ 1713
Concerning delay in human rights cases (linked to EB(Kosovo) v SSHD which proceeded to the House of Lords see [2008] UKHL 41).
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/1713.html

Rahman v SSHD [2005] EWCA Civ 1826
In which the Court of Appeal held there was a public law duty on the SSHD in a human rights case to ensure the court could determine the issue at hand by the provision of relevant information.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/1826.html

BK and Others (Spouses: Marriage- meaning of ‘subsisting’) Turkey [2005] UKAIT
Interpretation of ‘subsisting marriage’ under the Immigration Rules.

HM (Somalia) [2005] UKIAT 00040
The UKAIT recognised that women in Somalia formed a particular social group.

R (L) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 25, [2003] 1 WLR 1230
On the introduction of the clearly unfounded certification regime and the failure to publish the relevant legislation.  The Court accepted that there was potential unfairness in the government relying on unpublished legislation recognising ‘It is an aspect of the rule of law that individuals and those advising them, since they will be presumed to know the law, should have access to it in authentic form.’ [25].
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/25.html

Overview

Louise has expertise in international law and international human rights law generally and in particular relating to sex and gender and the ECHR.  Her work in this field has included examining legal frameworks and the implementation of laws relating to sex and gender-based violence, domestic violence, sexual orientation and gender identity (S/GBV) and persecution and trafficking cases. Domestically, this includes challenges to reasonable grounds and conclusive grounds decisions, refusals of residence permits, detention of victims of trafficking and breaches of the duty to investigate arising under policy and Article 4 ECHR.  Internationally, she is frequently called upon to provide expert advice, amicus briefs and training for governments, Judges, NGOs, academics and others by international bodies and charitable organisations.  She has worked in this capacity for many organisations including the Council of Europe, UNHCR, International Commission of Jurists, Rainbow Railroad, Women’s Link Worldwide.  She will be provided a key note speech on gender and asylum at the ELENA conference 2020.

Notable Cases

HJ (Iran), HT(Cameroon) v SSHD [2009] EWCA Civ 172
Relating to gay men in Iran. One of the groundbreaking refugee law cases of recent times establishing that where "discretion" or "hiding" - here of sexuality - was necessary to avoid serious harm persecution under the Refugee Convention was established. She successfully obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal for HJ prior to going on sabbatical on the grounds that the core arguments of the appellant (many of which succeeded in the House of Lords) were not determined by the Tribunal. She also gave the original advice to Stonewall in respect of the merits of an appeal to the Tribunal for HT.  Tribunal determination in HJ here: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIAT/2008/00044.html

Overview

Louise has assisted a significant number of victims of trafficking over the years to overturn negative decisions of the NRM, obtain release from detention and damages for a breach of article 4 duties to protect by the UK state.  Most of these complex cases were conceded by the government without a substantive hearing including one case in which she successfully argued at permission stage that it is at least arguable that SSHD v HAM [2016] EWCA Civ 565 is wrongly decided in respect of the ambit of the article 4 protection duty.

Louise was counsel in SM v SSHD [2015] EWHC 2467 (Admin) which established that there was no requirement of corroboration to determine whether or not a person was a victim of trafficking.  She was instructed as leading junior counsel in PG v SSHD in which permission was granted in respect of the definition of ‘public order grounds’ for detention.  That case settled with an award of damages for the Claimant.  She prevented the removal of KA, a victim of trafficking who had been previously disbelieved and subsequently detained pending removal resulting in her experiencing a psychotic breakdown in detention. 

She is currently instructed in litigation seeking to challenge systemic failures in cases involving children in the UK care system who become trafficked including issues resulting in their subsequent deportation and the lack of durable solutions for these children.   Those systemic issues include failure to apply for leave to remain and/or apply the correct policy to children, failure to obtain citizenship and failures to safeguard the child’s immigration status.  She is also working on approaches to remedies for historic injustice in these cases.

Louise was a founder member of the Anti-Trafficking Legal Project set up in 2006 to educate other professionals in best practice in trafficking cases, provide publicly accessible legal and training materials free of charge, respond to proposed legislative changes at domestic and European level and develop a network of lawyers and other professionals across the UK.

Notable Cases

Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.

TN(Vietnam) and US(Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Chancellor [2018] EWCA Civ 2838
Established 2005 Fast Track Procedure Rules were ultra vires. Overturned refusal of fresh claim and negative reasonable grounds decision.

PG v SSHD (2019- unreported)
Instructed as leading junior in PG v SSHD on the definition of ‘public order grounds’ for the purposes of detaining a victim of trafficking.  The case settled prior to the substantive hearing with compensation of £25000 for unlawful detention

KA v SSHD (unreported 2019)
Prevented the removal of KA, a victim of trafficking who had been previously disbelieved notwithstanding the fact she was rescued from a brothel and subsequently detained pending removal resulting in her experiencing a psychotic breakdown in detention. https://www.duncanlewis.co.uk/news/Chinese_victim_of_trafficking_released_from_detention_where_were_the_safeguards_when_our_client_needed_them___(28_February_2019).html

CP(Vietnam) v SSHD [2018] EWHC 2122 (Admin)
Breach of article 4 ECHR for failure to follow policy and failing to protect a vulnerable victim of trafficking who went missing following identification and was not re-identified as a victim when he was discovered in a cannabis factory. Unlawful detention on various grounds including misapplication of ‘public order grounds’ 
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/2122.html

Mutesi v SSHD [2015] EWHC 2467 (Admin)
No requirement of corroboration to establish whether or not a person was a victim of trafficking.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/2467.html

AA(Iraq) v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 23
Removal of a victim of trafficking under the Dublin II regulations, led by Kathryn Cronin.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/23.html

Overview

Louise regularly acts in complex and urgent detention claims either alone or more recently as leading junior counsel.  Many of these claims involve victims of trafficking and all but one since 1999 have been compromised following the Claimant’s release agreeing damages settlements prior to trial.

Notable Cases

Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.

SML v SSHD [2020] 5 WLUK 148
Interim relief: Immediate release of a Vietnamese national during Coronavirus pandemic to suitable accommodation provided by the Secretary of State.

PG v SSHD (2019- unreported)
Instructed as leading junior in PG v SSHD on the definition of ‘public order grounds’ for the purposes of detaining a victim of trafficking.  The case settled prior to the substantive hearing with compensation of £25000 for unlawful detention.

KA v SSHD (unreported 2019)
Prevented the removal of KA, a victim of trafficking who had been previously disbelieved notwithstanding the fact she was rescued from a brothel and subsequently detained pending removal resulting in her experiencing a psychotic breakdown in detention. https://www.duncanlewis.co.uk/news/Chinese_victim_of_trafficking_released_from_detention_where_were_the_safeguards_when_our_client_needed_them___(28_February_2019).html

CP(Vietnam) v SSHD [2018] EWHC 2122 (Admin)
Breach of article 4 ECHR for failure to follow policy and failing to protect a vulnerable victim of trafficking who went missing following identification and was not re-identified as a victim when he was discovered in a cannabis factory. Unlawful detention on various grounds including misapplication of ‘public order grounds’
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/2122.html