Immigration Appeals & Judicial Review
Challenging refusals through appeals, administrative review, and judicial review.
At Duan & Duan UK LLP, we understand the disappointment, frustration, and stress that can come with having an immigration application refused. Our partners have substantial combined experience in challenging Home Office immigration refusals before the Immigration Tribunals, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court — including acting in cases reported in the public law series.
We regularly act in immigration judicial review and appeal proceedings where a Home Office decision is considered unlawful or unreasonable, and work robustly for our clients within the boundaries of the applicable rules.
Our Appeals & Review Services
We handle administrative review of Home Office decisions, appeals to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), Upper Tribunal proceedings, Court of Appeal challenges, and judicial review applications. We have acted in reported cases, including in the Supreme Court, concerning the interpretation of the Immigration Rules.
Practice lead
Our immigration appeals and judicial review practice is led by Leon Chua, Partner at Duan & Duan UK LLP, who has appeared in public-law immigration proceedings reaching the Supreme Court — including Wang v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 679; [2023] UKSC 21 (in which Jackson Ng also acted) and Lee Ling Low v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 4. Consultations are in English, and for Mandarin or Cantonese-speaking clients with the firm's bilingual colleagues.
Frequently Asked Questions
My UK visa application has been refused. What are my options?
Depending on the refusal notice, the routes are: an in-country or out-of-country appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber); administrative review (for certain decisions where appeal rights do not apply); or judicial review in the Administrative Court or Upper Tribunal. Each has strict time limits, often 14 or 28 days, and choosing the correct route is decisive. Obtain legal advice promptly.
How do I challenge a Home Office decision by judicial review?
Judicial review challenges the lawfulness of a public-body decision on grounds of illegality, irrationality, or procedural unfairness. Claims must normally be filed within three months (immigration JR often shorter). The Administrative Court and the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) handle immigration JR. Urgent injunctions to prevent removal can be obtained out of hours where necessary.
What is 'section 3C leave' and when does it apply?
Section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 extends a person's lawful leave beyond its expiry date while an in-time application or appeal is pending before the Home Office or a tribunal. Failure by the Home Office to recognise 3C leave can itself be challenged by judicial review. This is frequently relevant where removal directions have been issued.
Can I appeal to the Upper Tribunal if I lose at the First-tier Tribunal?
Yes — but only on a point of law, and only with permission. The first step is an application to the First-tier Tribunal for permission to appeal; if refused, a renewed application to the Upper Tribunal. If granted, the Upper Tribunal decides whether the First-tier made an 'error of law' and can remit the case or re-make the decision itself.
What happens at a First-tier Tribunal (IAC) appeal?
The appeal is an oral hearing before an Immigration Judge. The Home Office is represented by a Presenting Officer. The appellant usually gives evidence; witnesses may also be called. Country-of-origin information, expert reports, and contemporary documentary evidence are critical. Appeals can be allowed, dismissed, or remitted.
I am a Chinese national. Do you handle my appeal in Mandarin?
Partner Leon Chua leads immigration appeals and judicial review, with Mandarin- and Cantonese-speaking colleagues available to support clients. Acted in R (Wang) v SSHD [2021] EWCA Civ 679; [2023] UKSC 21 — a leading Supreme Court authority on the Tier 1 (Investor) migrant route — and in Lee Ling Low v SSHD [2010] EWCA Civ 4. Tribunal hearings are in English with the assistance of a court-appointed interpreter where required.