Ahmed Sesay
Ahmed is a Partner and Solicitor-Advocate at Thames Hill with16 years of practice experience.
He is highly experienced in private and public funded cases in Immigration,
Nationality, Asylum, and Judicial Review.
Having previously worked in two high level Solicitor firms, Ahmed has practiced in
Immigration, Asylum, Nationality, Human Rights, Housing, Civil Litigation and Public
Law.
He now specialises in Immigration and Asylum cases and is often instructed to
represent clients in;
- Deportation Cases.
- Bail Applications,
- Citizenship Deprivation,
- Unlawful Detention & Civil Claims against Public Authorities for False
Imprisonment
- Error of Law challenges in the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunals and;
- Judicial Review applications in the Upper Tribunal and High Courts.
Ahmed has a track record of successful deportation appeals and judicial review
applications, including securing and negotiating substantial damages for clients
where they have been unlawfully detained.
Ahmed is described in the Legal 500, 2023, as a recommended lawyer in
Immigration law. Clients describe him as conscientious, precise and engaging with a
surgical approach to work.
Case Highlight
​
Tabrizagh & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 1398 (1 September 2014).
This case was the lead and test case on the lawfulness of return of asylum seekers to the first countries they arrived and claimed asylum
where they experienced treatment short of the standard required under the Refugee
Convention.
​
Tabrizagh & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014]
EWHC 1914 (Admin) (11 June 2014)
These cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal are
about whether the SSHD has a duty not to return to a safe third country where the returnee
suffered inhuman and degrading treatment previously.
​
Tesfay & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 415 (04 May 2016)
What are the appropriate costs where the SSHD withdraws his decision and agrees to reconsider a judicial review case.
Mohammed (Family Court proceedings-outcome) [2014] UKUT 419 (IAC) (5 September 2014)
Whether the mere lodging of family proceedings is enough to be relevant in immigration proceedings. This case has also been published in the leading Immigration Practitioner Handbook, McDonald 8th edition.
​
Kingsley E O v Secretary of state for the Home Department [2020] 9 WLUK 297
​
This case successfully challenged by interim and judicial review applications the legality of an ongoing detention of a foreign national offender who had a significant sentence for a serious offence. The Secretary of State for the Home Office Department settled this claim when the proceedings were transferred to the County Court as a claim for damages for false imprisonment.
​
FMO v Secretary for the Home Department -JR-2022-LON-00139
Mrs M Forbes J sitting as a Judge of the Upper Tribunal granted permission to proceed to judicially review the decision of the SSHD to refuse a fresh claim application based on risk on return in Northern Nigeria. These proceedings were compromised by the Secretary of State for the Home Department despite of her initial belligerence to the defending the claim.