伦敦盗抢太猖狂！高奢商场换“素提袋”，建材商损失£1.6万
近年来，英国的治安问题一直是社会关注的焦点。为了防盗，商家可谓是“煞费苦心”，使出浑身解数来防止盗窃。 &nb […]
永居5年或变10年，新政上路前还没满年限怎么办？
最近，关于英国5年、10年定居规则是否会有变化的传闻越来越多。不少人开始担心： 如果我还没走满年限，政策就改了 […]
非法聘请员工，曼城一家知名餐厅被罚8万镑！
在英国经营外籍菜系餐厅，若想做出地道风味，往往离不开从外国聘请厨师和员工。就拿中餐来说，没有中国本地师傅，很多 […]
夫妻准备开餐馆，却被禁止提供外卖服务？
对许多在英华人来说，开一家属于自己的餐馆是一种梦想。而在如今这个外卖盛行的时代，提供线上点餐和送餐服务几乎成了 […]
多人去世后遗产被骗子继承，百万镑资产落入陌生人手中？
在英格兰和威尔士，如果一个人去世时没有留下遗嘱，也找不到亲属，他的财产就会变成“无主财产”，被国家暂时接管。然 […]
秋季预算还要加税？Tesco老板怒喊“忍无可忍”！新就业法即将获批！
![Two recent immigration tribunal decisions have highlighted important points of principle in UK immigration law: the requirement for procedural fairness in decision-making and the legal distinction between a grant of leave and the administrative issuance of a Biometric Residence Permit (BRP).
Both cases demonstrate the need for applicants and their representatives to be vigilant in challenging decisions where the Home Office may have acted outside established legal boundaries.
Namecard for article - Angel Wan in English
Procedural Fairness in Hong Kong BN(O) Applications
In R (KW) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, JR-2024-LON-002169, the Upper Tribunal considered a refusal under the Hong Kong British National (Overseas) route. The applicant, a Chinese national from Hong Kong, had been refused on the basis of a previous conviction. The Home Office gave decisive weight to a Hong Kong Court of Appeal judgment it had located independently online, without putting this material to the applicant for comment.
The Tribunal found this to be a clear breach of procedural fairness, observing that the applicant had effectively been “ambushed” by evidence not disclosed to them.
While the Court of Appeal’s decision in Balajigari v Home Secretary [2019] EWCA Civ 673 was not directly applicable, it was considered a useful authority on fairness in immigration decision-making. The refusal was therefore quashed, and the case must now be reconsidered by the Home Office.
This judgment reinforces that applicants must be given an opportunity to respond to any evidence relied upon by decision-makers. Failure to do so will amount to procedural unfairness, providing strong grounds for judicial review.
The Legal Status of Biometric Residence Permits
The second case, Guerrero (s104(4A); statutory abandonment; right of appeal) [2025] UKUT 00276 (IAC), concerned an asylum seeker who received a refusal decision but was subsequently issued with a BRP stating “Refugee leave to remain.”
The First-tier Tribunal initially ruled that the BRP constituted a grant of leave, thereby treating the pending asylum appeal as abandoned under section 104(4A) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
On appeal, the Upper Tribunal clarified the legal position. A BRP does not in itself grant leave to remain, it is an administrative document that evidences an earlier grant of leave.
Where a BRP is issued in error, no grant of leave arises, and an appeal cannot be deemed abandoned.
The Tribunal also confirmed that decisions to treat appeals as abandoned under section 104(4A) are not “excluded decisions,” and therefore fall within the Upper Tribunal’s jurisdiction to review.
The First-tier Tribunal’s decision was set aside, and the case will be re-heard.
This decision underscores the importance of distinguishing between the substantive grant of leave and the administrative issuance of a BRP. Mistaken issuance of documents cannot override statutory rights of appeal.
Conclusion
Both cases serve as reminders of the importance of legal safeguards in the immigration system when it comes to immigration tribunal decisions. The KW case highlights that applicants must be given a fair opportunity to respond to evidence before adverse decisions are made. The Guerrero case confirms that a BRP is not determinative of immigration status and cannot substitute for an actual grant of leave.
These judgments illustrate the value of expert legal representation in holding the Home Office to account where decision-making falls short of the standards required by law.](https://lisaslaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/AdobeStock_284883829-1024x683.jpeg)
各位莎粉周五好，欢迎点击《丽莎商法快讯》，本周需要重点关注的英国商业、商法信息有： 秋季预算还要给企业加税：英 […]
别等政策收紧！想要申请永居一定要做的准备
之前我们聊过：英国五年、十年定居路线，未来可能面临政策上的收紧。想要重温的可以点击这里《英国定居路线要变？5年 […]
离婚后财产分配，法院到底看什么？
离婚时，最敏感、最容易引发争议的一个问题就是财产分配。很多人以为，法院会“站在某一方”，或者会考虑“谁先出轨” […]
店关一年了还不停被能源公司催缴！花钱却不能消灾了事？
在英国做生意，从来都不容易。英国的公司税本就不低，再加上其他各种税赋，严重阻碍了人们积极创业的心态。 &nbs […]
英永居“延至10年”成定局？首相要改庇护规则加速遣返！
莎粉们周三好！丽莎为大家整理了近期值得关注的英国移民快讯，本篇将涵盖的重点移民讯息有以下： 英国永居标准延至1 […]