The firm secured an emphatic victory in the High Court last week in a judgement
Date posted: 7 April 2015
The firm secured an emphatic victory in the High Court last week in a judgement (GB v Home Office) that establishes that the Home Office owes a non-delegable duty of care to detainees in Immigration Removal Centres (IRC).
The Claimant is a Nigerian national in her 30’s. In June 2012 she was detained in the infamous Yarlswood IRC, with a view to being removed to Nigeria. She was pregnant at that time. Following a medical examination by a doctor attending the IRC she was prescribed the anti-malarial drug, Mefloquine, also known as Lariam. GB pursues a claim in negligence against The Home Office arising out of this medical treatment which she received. It is said that the prescription of an anti-malarial drug caused her to suffer a severe psychotic reaction. The Home Office has a policy of prescribing anti-malarial drugs to people who are about to be removed to Malarial areas, such as Nigeria.
The Home Office sought to avoid any liability for what happened to GB in detention .The trial of a preliminary issue as to whether or not the Home Office owed to GB a non-delegable duty of care arose and we argued that the Home Office was responsible for the acts and omissions of the doctor who prescribed Mefloquine to her while she was pregnant. The court comprehensively found there was such a duty and the case will now proceed to trial.