When in substance a person had applied for LTR under Article 8 ECHR, not Article 3 ECHR, only the local authority could provide support – the asylum support regime was inapplicableZambrano carers:UK Visas and Immigration support

Facts: Ms N and her child, EAT, had applied for LTR under Article 8 ECHR. The Secretary of State for the Home Department had refused that application, referring to Article 3 as well as Article 8 ECHR. Ms N and EAT had appealed. Newham refused to provide support for them, under section 17 of the Children Act 1989, on the basis that section 122 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 applied, because Newham had reasonable grounds to believe that they had made a ‘claim for asylum’ (which includes a claim under Article 3 ECHR).

Judgment: Deputy High Court Judge Powell QC held that it was necessary to consider the terms in which the application was expressed. In this case, only Article 8 was referred to. The Secretary of State for the Home Department decision referred to Article 3 ECHR in a ‘belt and braces’ way. Accordingly, Newham had not had reasonable grounds to believe that Ms N and EAT had applied for asylum.