
Immigration & Asylum judgments from UK courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
The Upper Tribunal overturned the decision made by the First-tier Tribunal in an immigration case involving two brothers seeking a person a person as children of a former a person regiment member. The Tribunal found that the First-tier Judge's assessment of financial dependency and family life was legally incorrect, leading to the case being sent back for another hearing.
In this case, the Upper Tribunal dismissed an individual’s appeal for leave to remain in the UK based on their relationship with another person. The tribunal ruled that there was insufficient evidence of a genuine and subsisting relationship and no significant barriers to returning home.
The Upper Tribunal decided to send an asylum seeker's case back to the lower court for reconsideration. This decision was made because of recent changes in the appellant's personal life, such as their relationship with a partner who has also applied for asylum.
In this immigration case, the Upper Tribunal found that the lower court did not properly assess the evidence provided by an asylum seeker. The decision was overturned because the judge failed to consider important background information about conditions in Nigeria and provide clear reasons for dismissing the claimant’s account of events.
In this case, the Upper Tribunal rejected an individual’s appeal for entry clearance into the UK. The tribunal found that the applicant was not considered an adult dependent child and did not provide enough evidence to show family life with a a person in the UK under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In this case, the Upper Tribunal granted humanitarian protection to an Algerian man who was previously denied leave by the Home Office. He claimed asylum after exposing a a person drug dealer in Algeria but was initially rejected because his fears did not meet refugee criteria. The tribunal found that he would face serious harm if returned due to his involvement with powerful criminal networks.
In this case, the Upper Tribunal dismissed a judicial review application challenging an age assessment that determined the claimant was over 18 upon entry to the UK. The tribunal found that the assessment based on physical appearance and demeanour was not flawed despite inconsistencies in the applicant's account.
The Upper Tribunal ruled that an EU national can qualify for universal credit based on the benefits received by their UK national spouse, overturning a previous decision that denied the claimant universal credit at the couple rate.
The First-tier Tribunal revoked an HMO declaration for a a company housing asylum seekers because the temporary nature of their stay did not meet the criteria for residence under the Housing Act 2004.
The Upper Tribunal decided that a street musician's work is not considered self-employment for the purpose of obtaining residency rights in the UK under EU law. This ruling was based on the nature of the musician's earnings, which were not structured like traditional employment.
The Upper Tribunal reviewed a case involving a Polish national's right to reside in the UK. The case focused on the legality of certain immigration regulations and how they affect individuals' rights to reside.
The Upper Tribunal ruled that a woman from Nigeria, classified as a 'person from abroad' under UK immigration laws, was not eligible for housing benefit. The decision overturned a lower court ruling and denied the claimant's appeal.
The Upper Tribunal allowed an appeal from the First-tier Tribunal's decision to strike out an appeal against a refusal of registration as a provider of immigration advice or services. The Tribunal found an error of law in the First-tier Tribunal's decision and remanded the case for reconsideration.