Immigration News Weekly Roundup – 23 May 2025
This week reflect changes that are set to influence the advisory work of immigration professionals across the country. As the government presses forward with its efforts to reduce net migration, immigration advisers must now prepare to navigate a more restrictive and potentially contentious policy environment.
The Prime Minister’s reform package, ostensibly designed to reduce net migration by 100,000 annually, raises significant questions about proportionality and the proper exercise of executive discretion. Whilst the stated objective of reaching approximately 240,000 net migration per annum by the end of this Parliament may appear politically expedient, the legal ramifications are considerable and merit serious scrutiny.
The decision to terminate overseas recruitment for care home positions represents a particularly striking example of policy-making that appears to lack adequate consideration of its practical consequences. One must question whether such abrupt changes satisfy the requirements of proper consultation and impact assessment that the courts have consistently demanded of public authorities. The care sector’s reliance on international recruitment is not merely a matter of preference but of operational necessity, and the sudden withdrawal of this route may well constitute a breach of legitimate expectations.
The proposal to extend the residency requirement for indefinite leave to remain from five to ten years raises profound questions of retrospective application. Should this measure apply to existing applicants, it would almost certainly trigger significant litigation. The courts have repeatedly emphasised that retrospective changes to immigration rules must be subjected to the most rigorous scrutiny, particularly where they fundamentally alter the basis upon which individuals have structured their lives and made significant investments in the United Kingdom.
The trimming of the Graduate Route from two years to eighteen months appears to fly in the face of established principles regarding the UK’s competitive position in the global education market. Universities have invested considerable resources in attracting international students on the basis of existing arrangements, and this reduction may well constitute an interference with their legitimate business expectations.
Concurrently, the raising of skill and English language thresholds for the Skilled Worker visa represents a significant shift in the evidential burden placed upon applicants. Such changes inevitably raise questions about whether adequate transitional provisions have been made for those whose applications are currently in the system, and whether the new thresholds have been subjected to proper equality impact assessments.
The tragic events in the English Channel this week, resulting in two fatalities amongst over 820 arrivals on a single day, underscore the humanitarian imperative that continues to be inadequately addressed by current policy. With more than 13,500 Channel crossings recorded this year—a 30% increase on the previous year—the failure to provide safe and legal routes appears increasingly untenable from both humanitarian and practical perspectives.
The restoration of EU pet passports, whilst a welcome development for pet owners, serves as a reminder of the arbitrary nature of many post-Brexit restrictions and the government’s capacity to resolve practical difficulties when the political will exists.
The anticipated ONS confirmation that net migration fell to just over 500,000 in 2024 provides important context for assessing the proportionality of current measures. However, the persistent public misconception that migration exceeds one million annually highlights the extent to which policy is being driven by perception rather than evidence—a phenomenon that should concern all those committed to evidence-based governance.
The proposed youth mobility agreement with the European Union presents a fascinating case study in the tension between political rhetoric and economic pragmatism. Critics’ characterisation of this as “free movement by the back door” may prove legally significant if challenges arise based on the government’s stated Brexit commitments and the doctrine of legitimate expectations.
Important case law developments were also a highlight of the week, offering sharp judicial guidance on procedural fairness, evidential standards, and the limits of discretion in immigration decision-making. In QY (Vietnam), the Court of Appeal stressed that even under the lower asylum proof standard, tribunals must adequately explain how they resolve serious credibility concerns, particularly where the claim hinges on uncorroborated personal accounts. The Supreme Court in U3 affirmed that SIAC’s role in deprivation of citizenship cases is to review—not re-make—the Home Secretary’s national security assessments, reinforcing ministerial discretion in sensitive matters. Meanwhile, Chowdhury confirmed that while procedural unfairness in the Upper Tribunal can trigger High Court jurisdiction, not every defect alters the ultimate outcome, especially where immigration status is already precarious. Lastly, in R (Bibi), the Court of Appeal drew a firm line against the informal expansion of legal arguments mid-proceedings, reminding practitioners that the integrity of the judicial process hinges on procedural propriety.
For immigration advisers, the message is clear: the weeks ahead will require close monitoring, legal precision, and careful client management. The ground is shifting, and staying informed will be critical to dealing with the complexities that lie ahead.
With refusals on the rise—particularly as stricter policies take hold and procedural missteps multiply—judicial review claims are becoming an increasingly common route for redress. This surge presents an excellent opportunity for IAA Level 3 advisors to step into a more influential role in challenging unlawful or irrational decisions.
There’s no better time to upskill, and HJT’s Judicial Review for IAA (OISC) Advisors live online course is perfectly tailored for Level 3 advisors ready to expand their practice. Led by David Jones, the course demystifies Judicial Review Case Management (JRCM) authorisation, guiding you through the Commissioner’s Practice Note, the competence statement, and the key steps of the pre-action protocol process. You’ll also gain essential skills for instructing counsel under the Bar Standards Board’s Licensed Access Scheme—expertise that sets serious advisors apart in an increasingly complex legal protocol. Don’t miss this chance to upgrade your capabilities when your clients need it most.
Don’t miss out on this essential training opportunity. Places are limited, to book your spot, visit here
For more information on our other live online courses, visit here
Additionally, all significant updates on Rules, Case Law and procedural changes are covered comprehensively in Mastering Immigration Law. This valuable resource ensures immigration advisors can meet the everyday challenges through effective interpretation of the legal resources to accelerate their case successes.
For enquiries and FREE DEMO, contact us enquiries@hjt-training.co.uk or call 075441 64692.
For the full list of updates on media news, reports and Home Office Guidance and Policy updates, SEE BELOW
Immigration News
UK-based people smuggler jailed for 25 years over Mediterranean crossings – The Guardian
Ahmed Ebid, 42, helped bring nearly 3,800 people, including women and children, on just seven fishing boat crossings from north Africa to Italy between October 2022 and June 2023, the National Crime Agency (NCA) said.
For full report, click here
One person dead after small boat sinks in Channel, French authorities say – The Guardian
One person has died after a small boat sank while trying to cross the Channel overnight, French authorities said. Sixty-two people were pulled from the water after the “overloaded” boat broke up, the Maritime Prefect of the Channel and the North Sea said.
For full report, click here
Up to 700,000 migrants do not have UK eVisas, days before deadline – The Guardian
Hundreds of thousands of people have still not registered for eVisas, leaving them without the means to prove their immigration status just days before the final deadline. The new system has been dogged by a succession of technical problems. A high court challenge is under way arguing that the Home Office should put in a physical backup for times when the online system fails.
For full report, click here
Senior faith leaders urge Starmer to tone down migration rhetoric – The Guardian
More than a dozen bishops and other senior Christian, Muslim and Jewish faith leaders have written to the Prime Minister after his “island of strangers” speech, urging him to use a more “compassionate narrative” about migrants. The letter was sent to Keir Starmer after his speech on Monday, which preceded the publication of the government’s immigration white paper that has been widely criticised by migrant rights organisations and civil society groups.
For full report, click here
Is the government meeting its pledges on illegal immigration and asylum? – BBC News UK
The prime minister has made tackling illegal immigration and “restoring order” to the asylum system a priority for the government. Sir Keir Starmer has promised to “smash the gangs”. It follows predecessor Rishi Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats”.
For full report, click here
Care boss ‘really worried’ over immigration plans – BBC News UK
A care boss says she is “incredibly worried” by government plans to ban care workers from being recruited from overseas. She has spoken out after the Prime Minister announced the measure as one of several aimed at reducing net migration, which he said would bring the UK immigration system “back into control”.
For full report, click here
UK reforms to begin within weeks, but student levy requires legislation – The Pie Network
Following on from the release of the UK government’s immigration white paper last week, a research briefing has been released on May 21, answering some frequently asked questions about the changes.
While no fixed date has been set for the proposals to take effect, the changes will be rolled out over the course of this parliament, running through to 2029, with some measures expected “in the coming weeks”.
For full report, click here
Case Law
QY (Vietnam) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 607
The key takeaway from QY (Vietnam) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 607 is that the Court of Appeal upheld the Upper Tribunal’s decision to set aside a First-tier Tribunal’s allowance of a Vietnamese national’s humanitarian protection appeal, finding by a two-to-one majority that the First-tier Tribunal had failed to provide adequate reasons for concluding the appellant was credible despite serious concerns about his account. The Court emphasised that whilst asylum and protection claims operate under a lower standard of proof, tribunals must still explain in sufficient detail how “serious concerns” about credibility have been resolved, particularly when the appellant’s account depends solely on his own evidence without corroborating witness statements or documentary evidence. The case will now return to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh hearing.
For full decision, click here
U3 v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] UKSC 19
The Supreme Court upheld the deprivation of British citizenship of a woman in Syria who had allegedly aligned with ISIL, confirming that SIAC’s role is to review the Home Secretary’s discretionary decision rather than make its own findings of fact on a balance of probabilities. The Court emphasised that assessing national security risks involves evaluative judgements rather than determining specific facts, and that SIAC should place “very considerable weight” on the Home Secretary’s assessment given their access to expert intelligence advice. Whilst the Court corrected SIAC’s approach regarding the admissibility of post-decision evidence, this did not affect the outcome, and both the citizenship deprivation and Article 8 appeals were dismissed, leaving the appellant (who has three British children repatriated to the UK) without legal recourse.
For full decision, click here
Chowdhury v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 656
The Court of Appeal found the High Court had jurisdiction under section 11A(4)(c)(ii) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 to review the Upper Tribunal’s refusal of permission to appeal (because the UT’s failure to consider supplementary grounds of appeal constituted a procedural defect amounting to a fundamental breach of natural justice), the appeal was ultimately dismissed. This was because even if the First-tier Tribunal had wrongly concluded there was no protected family life between the appellant and her uncle rather than merely private life, the proportionality assessment and outcome would have been identical given that the relationship was established whilst the appellant was an overstayer with precarious immigration status, meaning the procedural unfairness made no substantive difference to the final decision.
For full decision, click here
R (Bibi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 622
The Court of Appeal firmly rejected attempts to expand legal arguments informally during proceedings without proper applications to amend grounds. Despite the appellant’s multiple visitor visa refusals spanning over a decade and various procedural errors by the Home Office, the Court dismissed her challenge because her legal representatives attempted to introduce new unpleaded arguments through renewal forms and skeleton arguments rather than making formal applications for permission to amend. The Court emphasised that such informal case expansion undermines the proper judicial process and has “very wide implications” for the immigration system, ultimately refusing to engage with the substance of arguments that hadn’t been properly pleaded, even where permission had been granted on related points.
For full decision, click here
Home Office Guidance and Documents Policy Updates
Guidance: Register of licensed sponsors: workers has been updated on 21st May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Guidance: Register of licensed sponsors: students has been updated on 21st May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Guidance: Visa processing times: applications inside the UK has been updated on 20th May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Guidance: Visa processing times: applications outside the UK has been updated on 20th May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Guidance: Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT) has been updated on 19th May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Guidance: Assessing age for asylum applicants: caseworker guidance has been updated on 19th May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Guidance: Algeria: country policy and information notes has been updated on 09th May 2025. To view the updated Guidance, click here
Written by Shareen Khan – Legal Content Writer, HJT Training
STAY TUNED FOR MORE IMMIGRATION NEWS NEXT WEEK!
Disclaimer: This blog post is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration advisors should consult the full decisions and official policy documents when advising clients on specific cases.
