Fiona McPhail

Upholding the judgment of the Outer House, judges said that the Home Office contractor did not act unlawfully by issuing eviction notices in Glasgow last year.

Govan Law Centre brought the case against Serco and the Home Secretary in August 2019, after which it appealed in the name of Kurdish Iraqi national Shakar Ali.

Serco was forced to pause the evictions of more than 330 asylum seekers after the legal challenge was made.

Ms Ali had no lease and paid no rent, making her occupation of the property “precarious”, Lady Dorrian said.

The Lord Justice Clerk stated: “The agreement under which she occupied the property made clear that her occupancy was temporary only, for the limited duration of the period, during which her asylum claim was being assessed.

“Once that claim was assessed the agreement provided for determination of the right to occupy, on service of written notice.”

Fiona McPhail, principal solicitor of Shelter Scotland, said: “This decision is deeply disappointing news for all those directly affected.

“We now face a situation where around 300 people will be at risk of summary eviction, with no right to homeless assistance or no right to work to earn their own income to cover rent, meaning there is a high risk they will end up on the streets of Glasgow.

“Our clients are continuing to progress their asylum claims and cannot return to their country of origin.

“The finding that Serco is not a public authority and therefore does not need to comply with the Human Rights Act is deeply concerning. It’s the state that has the statutory obligation to accommodate asylum seekers - if by privatising those services, the state can avoid its obligations under human rights law, this sets a dangerous precedent.”

Serco’s Julia Rogers said the court was clear that its approach was “completely proper and within the law”.

Judith Robertson, chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, which intervened in the case, said: “We have serious concerns about the implications of this ruling, both for the people directly affected and for the protection of human rights more broadly.

“The court’s finding that Serco is not acting as a public authority in this context, and therefore is not bound by human rights legal obligations, has profound consequences for how people’s rights are protected when public services are delivered by private providers.”