Immigration - Judicial review - damages claim for breach of convention rights committed before human rights legislation in force - proceedings not 'brought by or at the instigation of' the Crown - applicants not entitled to claim damagesR (Ben-Abdelaziz and Another) v Haringey London Borough Council: CA (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Lords Justice Pill and Arden): 22 May 2001The applicants, asylum seekers from Algeria, applied for judicial review of the council's decision refusing their claim for accommodation and support and dispersing them to Newcastle upon Tyne.

The applicants claimed damages in the proceedings under section 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in respect of alleged breaches by the council of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

On the trial of a preliminary issue the judge dismissed the applicants' damages claim, holding that under section 22(4) and section 7(1) of the Act the applicants were not entitled to claim damages for acts committed by the council before the Act came into force.

The applicants appealed.Manjit Gill QC and James Collins (instructed by Sheikh & Co) for the applicants; James Presland (instructed by the Borough solicitor, Haringey) for the council; Martin Chamberlain (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State for the Home Department, intervening.Held, dismissing the appeal, that the Crown's involvement in judicial review proceedings was only nominal and such proceedings were not in any sense brought by or at the Crown's instigation; that the proceedings were not therefore 'brought by or at the instigation of a public authority' within section 22(4) and, accordingly, the judge rightly concluded that the applicants were not entitled to claim damages in respect of the council's conduct before 2 October 2000.

(WLR)