In an important victory for the Home Office, the court said ministers had acted within their powers to deny support to a Malaysian man who had been sleeping rough at Heathrow Airport.

The ruling is part of an on-going battle between refugee groups and the government over contentious legislation which denies food and shelter to those who do not immediately apply for asylum.

Immigration minister Beverley Hughes welcomed the ruling as a victory for policies that tighten up asylum rules - but campaigners predicted they would continue to challenge the legislation.

Destitution

The Court of Appeal heard how "T", arrived in the UK in March and had been sleeping rough in Heathrow Airport since April after his application for benefits was denied.

SECTION 55 Introduced January 2003 Denies support to those who do not apply at port Partially over-turned, February 2003 Human rights test case won July 2003 Over-ruled by Court of Appeal Sept 2003

Under the controversial "Section 55" immigration rules introduced in January, the government can refuse benefits to asylum seekers who do not apply immediately at their port of arrival.

T had applied for asylum six days after arriving.

At his hearing in July, his lawyers argued his subsequent destitution following a rejection for support amounted to inhumane and degrading treatment under the Human Rights Act.

'Tough action'

But the Court of Appeal ruled on Tuesday Home Secretary David Blunkett was "within his rights" to deny the man assistance because although he was sleeping rough, he still had access to food and shelter.

It makes no sense for the Home Office to spend several hours interviewing someone about what colour lorry they travelled in and then leave them to beg on the streets for several months instead of promptly interviewing them about their claim for asylum Sheona York, Hammersmith Law Centre Q and A: Why the government welcomes asylum ruling

This meant, the court ruled, the refusal of assistance was not inhuman or degrading.

Ms Hughes welcomed the decision, saying: "The government has taken tough action to ensure that the asylum system in the United Kingdom is not open to misuse.

"Section 55 is a vital part of the package of measures that has seen asylum applications fall by half since last autumn.

She said this section of the legislation would continue to be operated in a "fair and robust manner."

"This judgement reinforces the message that those who do not claim asylum as soon as possible cannot expect to be supported merely because they assert they have no means of supporting themselves."

'More cases to come'

But the Refugee Council said the Home Office had only appealed against one of three test cases won in July - because ministers knew they faced defeat on human rights grounds had they challenged the other two.

Anna Reisenberger of the Refugee Council said: "This is a disappointing result for the thousands of asylum seekers affected by the Government's draconian asylum legislation, which will continue to leave asylum seekers homeless, hungry and begging for handouts.

Ms Reisenberger said charities, mosques, churches and refugee communities were being inundated with pleas for help.

"It is unfathomable why the Government is so intent on deliberately leaving vulnerable people destitute, when it should focus its resources and attention on deciding whose life is in danger and should be offered sanctuary," she said.

Sheona York, of the Hammersmith Law Centre which was involved in the challenge, said: "This decision will not do anything for the several hundreds of asylum seekers in a Section 55 backlog who are now faced with having to sleep rough and beg before being able to apply for help.

"We will continue to be inundated by desperate calls from clients for help.