Home secretary David Blunkett

The Court of Appeal has ruled against David Blunkett's policy of withdrawing benefits from anyone who fails to claim asylum shortly after entering the UK.

By a majority of two to one, senior judges ruled that withdrawing support was a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Campaigners welcomed the judgement, but the Home Office said in a statement that it was "disappointed" by the ruling and would seek leave to appeal to the House of Lords.

Deciding on the basis of three test cases, the senior judges backed a previous High Court judgement that it is necessary to provide support to an asylum seeker who has not claimed asylum
"as soon as reasonably practicable".

Since last December the government has said that asylum seekers should make their applications within three days of entering the country if they wish to receive support.

The tough approach was backed by parliament and contained within Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

But opponents of the move have argued that those who are unable to meet the deadline can be left destitute and homeless, breaching their human rights.

The Home Office said the "basic thrust" of its policy had been vindicated.

"In the present cases, the court was asked to give guidance on the circumstances in which a refusal to give support can be overturned on the basis that it can result in destitution and thereby threaten people's rights under Article 3," said a spokesman.

"We are considering the full implications of the court's decision and examining the options for the future.

"The essential point of Section 55 is that we are not prepared to use taxpayers' money on supporting people who make speculative asylum claims or who have some alternative source of support.

"Section 55 is working in tackling this kind of abuse and sends a clear message to those who are simply economic migrants that they will not be supported at public expense.

"It was introduced as part of a wider package of measures which has tightened up and reformed the entire asylum system - a package which together has brought asylum claims down by more than half since the autumn of 2002.

""It is a tough measure, but there are safeguards to protect the vulnerable. It is reasonable to expect people fleeing persecution and torture to claim asylum as soon as they can and we have always supported them."

If the judgement is upheld, the Home Office must now produce new guidance on the implementation of Section 55 to ensure that further breaches of human rights are avoided.

Campaign group Shelter said it was "delighted" by the ruling.

"This judgement is a victory for very vulnerable people who are in desperate need with nowhere to turn," said director Adam Sampson.

"Section 55 is threatening to greatly increase the number of homeless people on the streets - undermining the government's own successes in tackling rough sleeping.

"We hope that it will now not only implement the court's guidance but also undertake a thorough review of Section 55 called for by the home affairs select committee."