Judicial review

Judicial review

Immigration judicial review: heads of review and procedure

Judicial review is the process whereby the judges of the Administrative Division of the High Court, and from 1 November 2013 the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) exercise jurisdiction over the lawfulness of acts or omissions of public bodies and a supervisory jurisdiction over inferior courts and tribunals.

Acts or omissions will be unlawful and open to review if they fall under one of the available public law grounds of judicial review. The key grounds include:

•
illegality, ie where there was an error of law in the making of the decision
•
irrationality (in the Wednesbury sense) or unreasonableness
•
procedural impropriety and unfairness, and
•
the decision was in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 (usually involving an assessment of proportionality)

Consideration of the lawfulness of acts can also include consideration of the lawfulness of delegated legislation and of the Immigration Rules.

Judicial review is only available if an applicant has standing, ie sufficient interest in the decision, and if all other available remedies have been exhausted.

The issue of standing will generally not be

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Immigration News

The3Million and ILPA letter on people travelling with pending EUSS application

The3million and the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA) have written to the Minister for Migration and Citizenship, Seema Malhotra MP, urging policy changes to address a gap preventing individuals with an EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) Certificate of Application (CoA) from travelling to the UK since the full introduction of the Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) scheme for EEA and Swiss citizens on 2 April 2025. The letter calls for urgent policy changes, such as (preferably) instructing carriers to allow travel for those with pending EUSS applications or alternatively changing the Immigration Rules to permit ETA applications for this group. It also emphasises the need for clear guidance to carriers and affected individuals to prevent legal uncertainty and ensure compliance with the Withdrawal Agreement.

Immigration weekly highlights—17 April 2025

Welcome to the 17 April 2025 highlights from the Immigration team, which provides links to key news stories from the last week, as well as a round-up of new and updated content in Immigration.

ILPA publishes blog post on ‘crimes of arrival’

The Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA) has published a blog post by Francesca Parkes, a senior caseworker and Northern France coordinator at Refugee Legal Support. The blog looks at what is described as the current arbitrary application of section 24 D1 of the Immigration Act 1971, which was introduced by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 to criminalise persons who did not technically ‘enter’ the UK, but instead have arrived by ‘small boat’ without a valid entry clearance. Parkes critiques the lack of defences available for those prosecuted under this section and suggests legislative amendments to align with the Refugee Convention. The blog also addresses the inconsistencies in prosecution decisions. Recommendations include expanding the Article 31 defence to asylum seekers and revoking section 40 of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 to ensure fairer treatment. The blog also discusses how new offences targeting individuals arriving in the UK on ‘small boats’ are included in the Border Security, Immigration and Asylum Bill, which may exacerbate the situation. These offences relate to supplying and handling articles for immigration crime and the collection of information for immigration crime.

Home Office changes ‘qualifying overseas business link’ requirements for UK Expansion Worker route

As part of its various changes to Sponsor Guidance on 9 April 2025, the Home Office has made a number of revisions to the Workers and Temporary Workers: sponsor a Global Business Mobility worker guidance. In addition to changes to Global Business Mobility routes which are common to various other routes, including the extension of prohibitions on recouping sponsorship fees and associated administrative costs from sponsored workers, the guidance also includes a significant change to the ‘qualifying overseas business link’ requirement on the UK Expansion Worker route. Details of the updated provisions covering this requirement are set out below.