博客

Asian Mother scolds her son while travel A child cries a woman shakes her finger because of the boy bad behavior Rule of conduct boy cover his face and cry

离婚后，想带儿子回国看外公！10天都不给批？

2025年10月26日

阅读更多 »

Judge male judge in a courtroom striking the gavel

震惊！利用铁路系统漏洞，两名中国留学生诈骗超15万镑

2025年10月25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.

英通胀企稳，政府债却创新高！网上宣扬“逃税方案”被判刑

2025年10月24日

阅读更多 »

London skyline

不只永居！英入籍要改积分制，更难？工签雇主成本涨32%

2025年10月23日

阅读更多 »

雇佣合同里，最容易被忽视的那些条款

2025年10月23日

阅读更多 »

母亲的遗产，父亲在外的私生子女也能来瓜分？

2025年10月22日

阅读更多 »

Extinction Rebellion activists marching next to Downing Street with White Baby Prams in front of Police officers

一条路，9年纠纷！英国邻居吵不过，就开枪？

2025年10月22日

阅读更多 »

Tired and frustrated african business man at workplace in office holding his head on hands

为同一雇主打两份工，77小时不休！被解雇，法院竟支持？

2025年10月22日

阅读更多 »

英国婚前协议的5个你不知道的秘密

2025年10月21日

阅读更多 »

伦敦“赃物黑市”大曝光：警方突袭120家店，32人被抓！

2025年10月21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。