英中产急了，豪宅税要“年年交”？财相险些被“租房牌照”掀翻
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： 财政大臣的“租房乌龙”：一 […]
买了公寓想装修“自己家”？英国法院却说不行！?
在英国购买租赁产权的房产，很多人都会有一个疑问：我究竟能否“自由”装修？本质上，买房自然希望能够按照自己的喜好 […]
遗嘱没写对，可能完全无效？你以为签个名就行了吗？
很多人觉得立遗嘱就是“写下来、签个名”，就算完事。但你知道吗？哪怕少一个步骤、漏一个签名，整份遗嘱都可能被判无 […]
工党玩真的，一年内抓8千黑工，遣返上千人！为历史之最！
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： 庇护酒店成本飙至1 […]
廉航”敛财新招”？网站崩溃不让值机，现场加钱才给登机
在欧洲旅行，廉价航空几乎是所有普通旅客的“心头好”。 机票仅十几二十英镑，有时甚至比跨城火车或前 […]
伦敦一餐厅多次被投诉，如今被禁止放音乐？
如今的餐厅，几乎都希望营造出一种“格调”——不仅要让顾客吃得好，还要给他们留下特别的用餐体验。于是，越来越多的 […]
离婚后，想带儿子回国看外公！10天都不给批？
上周的家庭法案件中，我们提到了一位来自中国的母亲，希望带着两个孩子回国探亲。由于她此前曾有隐瞒行程、阻碍另一方 […]
震惊！利用铁路系统漏洞，两名中国留学生诈骗超15万镑
如果您曾在英国买过火车票，可能注意到，当乘坐的班次发生延误时，可以根据政府提供的赔偿计划申请一定金额的补偿，金 […]
英通胀企稳，政府债却创新高！网上宣扬“逃税方案”被判刑
![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： 英国通胀终于维持“稳定”， […]
不只永居！英入籍要改积分制，更难？工签雇主成本涨32%
莎粉们周四好！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： 雇主注意：企业担保 […]