## Facts

- WL, a national of the Democratic Republic of Congo, faced deportation from the United Kingdom after his asylum claim was refused by the Home Secretary.
- The Home Secretary issued a deportation order without providing clear and specific reasons, particularly related to the risks WL might face upon return to the DRC.
- WL challenged the deportation, arguing the reasons given were inadequate and failed to satisfy the requirements of procedural fairness.
- The dispute reached the Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether the Home Secretary is required to provide clear and specific reasons when making deportation and detention decisions.
2. Whether merely quoting legislation or providing brief statements satisfies the procedural fairness owed to individuals affected by such decisions.
3. Whether the absence of adequate reasons undermined the lawfulness of the deportation order against WL.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court held that the Home Secretary must provide precise and specific reasons for deportation decisions.
- The Court found that the impact of deportation and detention on individuals requires transparent decision-making and meaningful explanation.
- Brief statements or generic references to the law do not suffice; reasons must show how the decision was reached in the individual’s circumstances.
- The requirement for clear reasoning applies equally to both deportation and detention decisions due to their serious consequences.
- The ruling established a benchmark for the Home Office and influenced subsequent administrative procedures.

## Legal Principles

- Procedural fairness in administrative law mandates public authorities to act justly, requiring them to provide reasons for decisions significantly affecting individuals.
- The duty to give reasons ensures answerability and allows effective judicial review.
- Direct, specific communication from decision-makers is essential in protecting fundamental rights and preventing arbitrary exercise of power.
- The guidelines apply to both deportation and detention, recognizing the severe impact on liberty and personal rights.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court in R (WL (Congo)) v Home Secretary clarified that the Home Secretary must provide clear, specific reasons for deportation and detention decisions, thereby strengthening procedural fairness, supporting judicial review, and ensuring protection against arbitrary state action in administrative law.

R (WL (Congo)) v Home Secretary [2012] 1 AC 245