博客

Lawyer desk in the office justice law concept

当歧视藏在语气里：她用沉默撼动法庭，打赢Boots！

2025年12月28日

阅读更多 »

Abandoned house

伦敦一套“恐怖房”拍卖价近百万英镑，引网友炸锅

2025年12月28日

阅读更多 »

DWP又出错！女子被疯狂讨债五年，5千镑却不是她欠的？

2025年12月27日

阅读更多 »

shopping mall

移民局车站突击执法，工签被当黑工抓！程序失当遭打脸

2025年12月26日

阅读更多 »

专业守护．真心相伴！丽莎律师行2025年大事记！

2025年12月25日

阅读更多 »

Team of business people standing in the office and discussing something work related

里夫斯提前锁定春季声明！英国新“雇佣法”获御准

2025年12月24日

阅读更多 »

british hmo

房产空置多年，房东不交商业地税！最终被罚20万英镑

2025年12月23日

阅读更多 »

justice lawyer in black suit pointing finger and knocking wooden judge gavel with documents on workplace desk in courtroom office occupation business justice law and legal service concept

福尔摩斯博物馆创始人太惨！出庭百余次，还欠妹妹50万镑诉讼费

2025年12月21日

阅读更多 »

person working on laptop

商家警惕！女子曾白吃白住逃单800英镑，一年后竟再次行骗

2025年12月20日

阅读更多 »

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.

英终降息,3年来最低点！董事伪造账单，获刑15个月

2025年12月19日

阅读更多 »

丽莎律师行定期发布实用文章，欢迎关注我们，第一时间获取最新法律资讯！

如果您有任何疑问，欢迎直接联络我们，提出任何法律咨询。

订阅我们的电子报

Subscribe Newsletter Blog Sidebar Chinese

3 8 月, 2026

1.5万镑罚款作废！非法打工罚单有误，英最高法院打脸移民局

3 8 月, 2026

突发! 您的律所被SRA关闭了，您的权益如何保障？

2 8 月, 2026

逆转！离婚仅分27万镑;；3年后从前夫手中赢回660万镑！

31 7 月, 2026

英利率3.75%或再加息；中央重磅税收下放！京东超1亿镑布局伦敦

June 2024

欢迎咨询我们，并了解我们如何提供帮助。