Public authorities in the UK hold significant power to make decisions that impact individuals, businesses, and communities. However, this power is not absolute. When a public body acts unlawfully, irrationally, or beyond its authority, the courts provide a legal mechanism known as judicial review — a process that allows affected individuals to challenge those decisions.
Judicial review means the legal process by which UK courts assess the lawfulness of government decisions and actions, ensuring that public authorities act within their legal powers and respect human rights.
At Salam Immigration, we often encounter clients who feel wronged by immigration or administrative decisions but are unsure of their legal remedies. Understanding the judicial review process UK is essential to protecting your rights and ensuring accountability in public decision-making, especially when those decisions involve the exercise of a public function by public authorities.
What Is judicial review process uk?
Judicial review is a vital mechanism that ensures fairness, legality, and accountability in public decision-making. It allows individuals or organisations to challenge the lawfulness of actions taken by public bodies, such as government departments, local councils, the Home Office, and tribunals.
Judicial review relates to the legality of decisions, actions, or omissions by public authorities, focusing on whether those decisions can be challenged on grounds such as illegality, procedural unfairness, or irrationality. Only certain types of decisions and actions are suitable for judicial review, and claimants must demonstrate standing or sufficient interest to bring a claim.
This process is typically handled by specialist judges in the Administrative Court, part of the High Court of Justice in England and Wales, and equivalent courts in Scotland and Northern Ireland. These judges oversee judicial review cases, ensuring that the proper procedures are followed. Judicial review is a cornerstone of the rule of law, ensuring that no public authority operates beyond its legal limits.
When Is judicial review process UK Applicable?
Judicial review applies when:
- A public body’s decision affects an individual’s rights, obligations, or legitimate expectations and is being challenged.
- There is no alternative legal remedy (such as an appeal or complaint) or other alternative remedies available.
- The decision is alleged to be unlawful, unreasonable, or procedurally unfair.
Judicial review is considered a last resort, only available after all alternative remedies have been exhausted.
Examples include:
- Refusal of an immigration application without fair consideration.
- Unlawful detention by the Home Office.
- Policy decisions by a local authority made without consultation.
- Decisions relating to welfare benefits or planning permission.
Judicial review does not aim to replace administrative decisions but to ensure those decisions comply with the law.
Legal Grounds for judicial review process uk
The judicial review process UK operates on well-established legal principles. Only decisions made by public bodies in the exercise of their public function can be reviewed by the court for lawfulness. These principles determine whether a court can intervene in a public body’s decision. The three core grounds for judicial review are illegality, irrationality, and procedural unfairness. Each plays a distinct role in maintaining the integrity of government decision-making.
1. Illegality (Acting Beyond Legal Powers)
A public authority must act strictly within the scope of powers granted to it by law. When it acts outside or misuses these powers, its decision is deemed ultra vires — a Latin term meaning “beyond powers”.
Examples of Illegality:
- A local council issuing a policy that contradicts national law.
- The Home Office refusing a visa application based on irrelevant factors not allowed by legislation.
- A competent authority, such as a regulatory body responsible for compliance with Public Service Obligations under the Transport Regulations 2023, making a decision that exceeds its legal powers.
- The First-tier Tribunal making a determination in an immigration or asylum case that goes beyond its statutory authority, which may be subject to judicial review.
- A decision-maker delegating authority to someone who has no legal power to act.
Courts will examine whether the decision-maker understood and correctly applied the law. If not, the decision may be declared unlawful and quashed.
2. Irrationality (Unreasonableness)
The second ground focuses on whether the decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would have made it. This is often called the Wednesbury unreasonableness test, based on a landmark 1948 case.
Examples of Irrational Decisions:
- Deporting an individual despite compelling humanitarian grounds ignored in the case.
- Refusing benefits or support without considering relevant evidence.
- Imposing sanctions or penalties disproportionate to the circumstances.
While courts generally avoid substituting their own judgment, they will intervene if the outcome is outrageously unreasonable or lacks logical justification.
If a decision is quashed for irrationality, the public body may be required to remake the same decision, but this time by following the correct legal procedures to ensure lawfulness.
3. Procedural Unfairness (Breach of Natural Justice)
The principle of natural justice requires public bodies to act fairly. This includes giving individuals a fair hearing, avoiding bias, and following proper procedures before making decisions.
Examples of Procedural Unfairness:
- Failing to give notice or an opportunity to respond before a decision.
- Decision-makers having conflicts of interest.
- Ignoring key evidence or refusing access to documents used in decision-making.
Courts ensure that every affected person has the right to a fair process — regardless of the eventual decision outcome. When deciding whether to grant a remedy, the court will consider whether the conduct complained of had a substantive effect on the outcome.
Who Can Apply for Judicial Review in the UK?
The judicial review process UK is designed to protect individuals, organisations, and even companies from unlawful decisions made by public bodies. However, not everyone can apply. The applicant must have a “sufficient interest” in the matter to make an application for judicial review, and the application must be made within strict time limits.
Let’s explore who qualifies, when you can apply, and what the key procedural requirements are. A judicial review application must meet strict procedural requirements, including the correct forms, fees, and deadlines.
Standing (Locus Standi)
To bring a judicial review case, you must show that you are directly affected by the public body’s decision or action. This concept, known as locus standi, ensures that the courts only deal with cases involving genuine interests.
Eligible applicants may include:
- Individuals affected by immigration or housing decisions.
- Businesses impacted by regulatory or licensing authorities.
- NGOs or pressure groups challenging policies that affect their area of work.
- Local communities affected by planning or environmental decisions.
Example:
If a local council approves a harmful development plan, an environmental charity may have standing to challenge it if it directly affects its mission or members.
The courts apply a flexible interpretation of “sufficient interest” in public interest cases — especially when issues of human rights, discrimination, or access to justice are involved.
Time Limits for judicial review process uk Applications
Time is critical in the judicial review process UK. Courts strictly enforce the deadlines for filing applications.
General rule:
- You must file your claim promptly and within three months from the date of the decision you are challenging.
Exceptions:
- For certain matters like planning decisions or procurement disputes, shorter deadlines (often 6 weeks or 30 days) apply.
- The court may refuse your application if you delay, even within the 3-month limit, if the delay is unreasonable.
Tip: Always seek legal advice immediately after receiving an unfavourable decision to avoid missing the filing window.
Permission Stage
Before proceeding to a full hearing, you must first apply for permission (leave) to bring the judicial review claim. This stage acts as a filter to prevent weak or frivolous cases from reaching the courts.
The court reviews your application and supporting documents to decide whether:
- There is an arguable case; and
- The issue is worth full judicial consideration.
If you wish to rely on additional grounds not included in your original application, you must seek the court’s permission.
If permission is refused, you can request an oral renewal hearing where a judge will reconsider your application.
Who the Claim is Brought Against
Judicial review claims are filed against the public body responsible for the decision — not individual officers.
Examples include:
- The Home Office or UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) in immigration matters.
- Local councils in planning or housing cases.
- Government departments or regulatory agencies.
If multiple bodies were involved in the decision-making process, your solicitor will help identify the correct defendant(s) for the claim.
Grounds and Evidence Required for a Successful Judicial Review Claim
To succeed in a judicial review process UK, it is not enough to simply disagree with a public body’s decision. The court must be convinced that the decision was unlawful, irrational, or procedurally unfair. In some cases, claims may proceed as a statutory challenge under specific legislation, such as those relating to planning permissions or enforcement of planning controls.
If the court finds in your favour, it may grant remedies such as quashing, prohibiting, or mandatory orders. The court may also grant other remedies, depending on the circumstances and recent legal reforms affecting their scope.
1. Key Grounds for judicial review process uk
The judicial review process UK recognises several specific grounds on which you can challenge a decision. These are based on long-standing principles of administrative law and ensure that public bodies act fairly, lawfully, and reasonably.
Let’s look at the three main grounds for judicial review:
a. Illegality
A decision may be considered illegal if the public body has:
- Acted outside the powers granted to it by law (ultra vires).
- Misinterpreted or misapplied the law.
- Considered irrelevant factors or ignored relevant ones.
- Failed to follow statutory duties.
Example:
If the Home Office refuses a visa on grounds not permitted by immigration rules, that decision could be challenged for illegality.
b. Irrationality (Unreasonableness)
This occurs when a decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have made it — often called the Wednesbury unreasonableness test.
Example:
If a local authority fines a small business excessively for a minor regulatory breach, the court may find the action disproportionate and therefore irrational.
c. Procedural Impropriety
A decision may be unlawful if proper procedures were not followed — such as:
- Failure to consult affected parties.
- Not giving the applicant a fair hearing.
- Bias or appearance of bias in decision-making.
- Breach of statutory procedural requirements.
Example:
If an asylum seeker’s appeal is dismissed without the opportunity to present crucial evidence, this could form grounds for judicial review.
2. Human Rights and Legitimate Expectation
In recent years, the judicial review process UK has evolved to include cases based on human rights violations and the concept of legitimate expectation.
Human Rights Challenges
Under the Human Rights Act 1998, individuals can challenge decisions that violate their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
For example:
- Unlawful detention (Article 5).
- Discrimination (Article 14).
- Violation of family or private life (Article 8).
Legitimate Expectation
A person may have a legitimate expectation that a public body will act in a certain way — based on promises, policies, or consistent past behaviour.
If that expectation is unfairly denied, the court may intervene.
Example:
If the Home Office publishes a policy allowing applicants to extend visas under certain conditions, and then denies someone the chance without justification, that could breach legitimate expectation.
3. The Role of Evidence in judicial review process uk
Evidence is the foundation of every successful claim in the judicial review process UK. The court does not re-hear the case or assess whether the decision was “right” or “wrong” — it looks at how the decision was made.
You will need to provide:
- All correspondence with the public body (emails, letters, notifications).
- The official decision or notice being challenged.
- Supporting documents such as reports, witness statements, or expert opinions.
- Chronology of events showing the timeline and actions taken.
- Legal grounds explaining how the decision breached the law or fairness.
Courts prefer clear, factual, and chronological presentation of evidence. Your solicitor will ensure all relevant materials are included and filed in the correct format under the Civil Procedure Rules.
4. Remedies Available in judicial review process uk
If your judicial review process UK claim is successful, the court may issue one or more of the following remedies:
- Quashing Order: Cancels the unlawful decision, forcing the public body to reconsider.
- Prohibiting Order: Prevents a public authority from taking an unlawful action.
- Mandatory Order: Compels a public authority to perform a duty it has neglected.
- Declaration: Clarifies the legal rights and obligations of the parties.
- Injunction: Temporarily prevents a public body from taking further action pending resolution.
- Damages: The court may award damages, but only in specific circumstances, such as breaches of human rights or tort law. Damages are not typically awarded as the sole remedy in judicial review claims.
The court makes decisions on which remedy to grant based on the facts of the case and the relevant legal rules. In cases of exceptional public interest, the court may exercise discretion in granting remedies to ensure that justice is served and the public interest is protected.
These remedies ensure that public bodies are held accountable for following the rule of law and acting fairly toward citizens.
Step-by-Step judicial review process uk Courts
The judicial review process UK follows a structured and time-sensitive procedure. Every stage—from preparing a pre-action protocol letter to attending a court hearing—requires attention to legal details and deadlines. Before initiating judicial review proceedings, it is crucial to engage in pre action correspondence, as this encourages parties to resolve disputes out of court and failure to do so may result in cost penalties. Missing a step or submitting incomplete documents can cause the entire application to fail.
Here is a step-by-step breakdown of how the judicial review process typically unfolds in the UK. If the case proceeds to a hearing, it will be heard by a judge.
Pre-Action Stage (Letter Before Claim)
Before filing a judicial review claim, you must send a “Letter Before Claim” to the public body you intend to challenge. This step is mandatory under the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review, and it aims to encourage early resolution without involving the courts.
The letter should include:
- The decision being challenged and the date it was made.
- A brief summary of facts and the legal grounds for your challenge.
- The remedy or action you are seeking (for example, reversal of the decision).
- A reasonable deadline for response (usually 14 days).
The public body may either respond by defending its position or, in some cases, withdraw or amend the decision to avoid litigation. If you receive no satisfactory response, you can proceed to file your claim in court.
Filing the Claim
If the matter remains unresolved, the next step in the judicial review process UK is to file a claim with the Administrative Court.
You’ll need to complete Form N461 (Judicial Review Claim Form) and submit it with the following supporting documents:
- A Statement of Grounds (outlining the legal basis of your challenge).
- A Statement of Facts (explaining what happened).
- All relevant evidence and documents.
- A certified copy of the decision being challenged.
- Court fee (varies depending on the case type).
The claim must be filed within three months of the date of the decision (or earlier in some cases, as mentioned previously).
Once the claim is filed, the court will review it and assign a case number.
Permission (Leave) Stage
The permission stage acts as a filter mechanism to ensure only arguable cases proceed to a full hearing.
The court examines your documents and decides whether:
- The claim is arguable;
- The claim has been made within the correct timeframe; and
- You have standing (sufficient interest in the decision).
If permission is granted, your case proceeds to a substantive hearing.
If permission is refused, you can apply for an oral renewal—a short hearing before a judge to request reconsideration.
Most weak or procedurally defective claims are dismissed at this stage.
Substantive (Full) Hearing
Once permission is granted, the court sets a date for the full judicial review hearing, also known as the final hearing. This is the stage where both parties—the claimant (you) and the defendant (the public body)—present their arguments before a judge. If the parties agree, the court may decide the case without a hearing.
Key aspects of this stage include:
- Written arguments (called skeleton arguments) are exchanged before the hearing.
- Oral submissions are made by the barristers or solicitors in court.
- The judge evaluates whether the public body acted within the law and observed fairness.
Unlike other cases, the judicial review process UK does not involve witnesses or cross-examinations unless exceptional circumstances require them. The focus is on the lawfulness of the decision-making process, not on re-evaluating the facts.
Court’s Judgment and Remedies
After hearing the case, the court may:
- Dismiss the claim if no legal error is found; or
- Grant a remedy if the decision was unlawful, unreasonable, or procedurally unfair.
The judgment can include orders such as:
- Quashing Order (voiding the decision).
- Mandatory Order (forcing the authority to act).
- Prohibiting Order (preventing further unlawful acts).
- Declaratory Relief (clarifying legal rights).
If successful, the court may also award legal costs in your favour.
Appeals and Further Remedies
If you disagree with the outcome, you may appeal to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division), provided you have valid grounds and the court grants permission.
However, appeals in judicial review cases are limited to points of law, not re-assessment of facts.
Role of Solicitors in the judicial review process uk
Having expert legal representation is crucial for navigating the judicial review process UK. Skilled solicitors ensure that:
- Your claim is filed within the deadline.
- All procedural steps are followed correctly.
- Strong evidence and legal arguments support your case.
- Communication with the public body is handled professionally and strategically.
At Salam Immigration, for example, experienced immigration solicitors handle judicial reviews related to Home Office decisions, visa refusals, and unlawful detentions—ensuring that every procedural and legal requirement is meticulously addressed.
Interested Parties in Judicial Review Proceedings
In the context of judicial review proceedings, interested parties are individuals or organizations who, while not the main claimant or the public authority being challenged, have a sufficient interest in the outcome of the case. These parties are directly affected by the decision or conduct under review and have a legitimate stake in the judicial review process.
To participate in judicial review proceedings, an interested party must act within a strict time limit—typically 21 days from the date the claim form is served. During this period, the interested party should file an acknowledgment of service with the Administrative Court. This document outlines the grounds on which the interested party contests or supports the claim and must include the names and addresses of any other persons who may also be considered interested parties. The acknowledgment of service is a crucial step in the judicial review procedure, as it formally notifies the court and other parties of the interested party’s intention to be involved.
Interested parties play a vital role in judicial review cases. Their participation ensures that the court hears from all those directly affected by the public authority’s decision, not just the claimant and the defendant. By providing additional evidence, legal arguments, or unique perspectives, interested parties can help the court reach a more informed and balanced decision. The judicial review process is designed to be fair and comprehensive, and the involvement of interested parties supports this aim.
The Administrative Court has the authority to manage the participation of interested parties throughout the judicial review proceedings. The court may direct that an interested party be formally joined to the case, or grant permission for them to submit written evidence or make oral representations at the hearing. This flexibility ensures that the judicial review process remains responsive to the needs of all those with a sufficient interest in the outcome.
It is important to note that, in certain cases, interested parties may be required to contribute to the costs of the proceedings, depending on their conduct and the court’s assessment of their involvement. The court will consider whether the interested party’s actions have been reasonable and whether their participation has assisted or hindered the efficient resolution of the claim.
The Human Rights Act 1998 is also highly relevant in judicial review proceedings. Interested parties can argue that a public authority’s decision or conduct has breached their human rights, and the court will take these arguments into account when determining whether the decision should be upheld or quashed. This is particularly significant in cases where the rights of multiple individuals or groups are at stake.
In summary, interested parties are an essential component of the judicial review process in the UK. Their involvement helps ensure that the Administrative Court considers all relevant interests and perspectives before making a decision. If you believe you are directly affected by a public body’s decision and wish to participate as an interested party in judicial review proceedings, it is crucial to seek legal advice promptly to understand your rights, obligations, and the correct procedure for becoming involved.
Judicial Review in Immigration Cases: Common Examples and Challenges
In the UK, one of the most frequent areas where the judicial review process UK is used is in immigration law. Immigration and asylum judicial reviews may be brought in the Upper Tribunal, specifically the Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC) or the Asylum Chamber, depending on the nature of the decision being challenged. When applicants or migrants face unfair treatment, delays, or wrongful refusals from the Home Office, judicial review becomes an essential legal tool to ensure justice.
This section explains how judicial review applies in immigration cases, the most common types of claims, and the key challenges applicants should be aware of.
1. When Judicial Review is Used in Immigration Cases
Judicial review in immigration is not about disagreeing with a decision — it’s about challenging the lawfulness of how that decision was made.
You cannot use judicial review as a substitute for an appeal. Instead, it applies when:
- There is no right of appeal available;
- The appeal route has been exhausted; or
- The Home Office has acted unlawfully or unreasonably.
Common examples include:
- Unlawful visa refusals or revocations.
- Delays in processing visa or asylum applications.
- Unlawful detention or removal orders.
- Decisions breaching human rights (Article 8 – right to family and private life).
- Refusals to reconsider applications despite new evidence.
2. Home Office Delays and Unlawful Detention
Delays in Decision-Making
Excessive or unexplained Home Office delays are one of the most cited reasons for judicial review.
If an application takes significantly longer than published service standards without justification, an applicant can challenge it through judicial review.
Courts have previously found the Home Office to be acting unlawfully when delays caused:
- Loss of job opportunities;
- Inability to travel or maintain family life;
- Financial or emotional distress — and if Judicial Review deadlines are missed, you could lose your right to challenge the Home Office permanently.
Unlawful Detention
Judicial review also applies when individuals are detained for immigration purposes without proper legal authority or for unreasonable lengths of time.
Courts assess: key factors in trust and will disputes resolution.
- Whether there was a valid reason for detention;
- Whether detention was proportionate; and
- Whether alternatives to detention were considered.
If the court finds detention unlawful, it can order immediate release and award compensation.
3. Human Rights-Based judicial review process uk
Many immigration-related judicial reviews rely on human rights arguments under the Human Rights Act 1998.
The judicial review process UK allows individuals to challenge decisions that violate their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including:
- Article 3: Protection against inhumane or degrading treatment.
- Article 5: Right to liberty and security.
- Article 8: Right to family and private life.
- Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination.
For professional immigration legal support regarding these rights, contact Salam Immigration Lawyers.
For instance, a deportation decision that separates parents from their British children may be challenged under Article 8.
Courts weigh the public interest in immigration control against the individual’s right to family life.
4. Typical Challenges Faced by Applicants
While the judicial review process UK is powerful, it is also complex and highly technical. Applicants often face the following challenges:
- Tight Deadlines: Immigration judicial reviews must usually be filed within 3 months, or even sooner for urgent cases.
- High Legal Costs: Judicial review can be costly if pursued without proper legal strategy or legal aid.
- Evidential Requirements: Weak or incomplete evidence can result in dismissal at the permission stage.
- Procedural Errors: Missing pre-action steps or incorrect paperwork can make an otherwise valid claim inadmissible.
This is why expert legal assistance is critical. Experienced immigration solicitors not only understand immigration law but also have the procedural expertise to prepare compelling judicial review claims.
5. Interim Relief and Urgent Applications
In urgent immigration cases—such as imminent deportations—your solicitor can request interim relief while the judicial review process UK is pending.
This is a temporary order that prevents the Home Office from taking action (like removing or deporting you) until the court reviews the legality of the decision.
To obtain interim relief, you must show:
- There is a serious issue to be tried;
- The harm caused by removal is irreversible; and
- The claim has a reasonable chance of success.
Courts handle such applications swiftly—sometimes within hours—if there is an immediate risk of injustice.
How Solicitors Assist in the Judicial Review Process UK
The judicial review process UK is one of the most technical areas of public law. It demands not only a deep understanding of administrative principles but also precision in timing, paperwork, and argumentation. For this reason, having expert solicitors is not just advisable — it’s essential for increasing your chances of success.
Below, we explain how immigration and public law solicitors guide clients through each stage, protect their rights, and ensure that every claim is strategically built to meet court standards.
1. Initial Assessment and Case Evaluation
The first and most important step your solicitor takes is assessing the viability of your case. Judicial review is not suitable for every situation.
Your solicitor will evaluate:
- Whether the case involves a public body decision (such as the Home Office or a local authority).
- Whether there are valid legal grounds (illegality, unreasonableness, procedural unfairness).
- Whether judicial review is the correct legal remedy — or if an appeal or complaint would be more effective.
- The strength of your evidence and the likelihood of success.
If your case is suitable, the solicitor will prepare a detailed legal strategy, mapping out deadlines and procedural steps to ensure strict compliance with court rules.
2. Drafting the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP) Letter
A well-written Pre-Action Protocol Letter (Letter Before Claim) can sometimes resolve a dispute without the need to go to court.
Your solicitor will:
- Draft the letter in clear, legally precise terms.
- Identify the specific decision being challenged.
- Outline the grounds of challenge and relevant laws.
- Request that the public body review or reverse its decision within a set period.
In many cases, once the Home Office or another authority receives a properly drafted PAP letter, they reconsider their decision, avoiding the need for court proceedings altogether.
3. Preparing and Filing the judicial review process uk Claim
If the public body refuses to act or fails to respond, your solicitor will move forward with filing the judicial review claim in the Administrative Court.
This includes:
- Preparing Form N461 and supporting documents.
- Drafting the Statement of Facts and Grounds to highlight legal errors.
- Compiling all relevant evidence, such as letters, notices, or records.
- Ensuring that the claim is filed within strict time limits.
Even a small mistake at this stage—like missing a deadline or submitting incomplete forms—can result in automatic dismissal, which is why professional handling is crucial.
4. Representing Clients During the Permission and Hearing Stages
During the permission stage, your solicitor’s advocacy and written submissions play a critical role in persuading the judge that your case is arguable and deserves a full hearing.
If permission is granted, your solicitor will:
- Instruct a barrister to represent you in court.
- Prepare skeleton arguments summarising your position.
- Respond to the defendant’s legal submissions.
- Ensure all court deadlines and orders are followed accurately.
At the substantive hearing, your legal team will focus on demonstrating how the decision breached administrative law principles — not on rearguing the facts of the case, but on proving unlawfulness or procedural unfairness.
5. Post-Judgment Support and Enforcement
Once the judgment is delivered, your solicitor will:
- Explain the outcome and its legal implications.
- Apply for costs if the court rules in your favour.
- Seek to enforce any court orders (for example, requiring the Home Office to reconsider a visa application).
- Advise on appeal options if the decision goes against you.
If your judicial review succeeds, the solicitor will also ensure that the public body complies promptly with the court’s decision and does not repeat the same procedural flaws.
6. Why Choose a Specialist Solicitor
Judicial review demands precision, strategy, and an in-depth understanding of both public law and court procedures. Specialist solicitors:
- Are familiar with Administrative Court expectations.
- Understand how to present complex cases clearly.
- Work with experienced barristers and legal experts.
- Provide strategic advice to strengthen weak cases before filing.
At Salam Immigration, our solicitors specialise in immigration-related judicial reviews, helping clients challenge unlawful Home Office decisions, detention cases, and visa refusals. We approach every case with careful legal research, factual accuracy, and a deep respect for our clients’ rights under UK law.
Need to Challenge an Unfair Decision? Salam Immigration Can Help
At Salam Immigration, we understand how stressful it can be when a public body makes a decision that seems unjust or unlawful. Our expert solicitors specialise in judicial review process UK cases, offering practical advice and robust representation to protect your rights.
Why Choose Salam Immigration
- Decades of combined experience in UK immigration and public law
- Transparent guidance through every step of the process
- Fast, efficient filing and representation before the High Court
- Affordable and flexible fee structures
If you believe a decision made against you was procedurally unfair, unlawful, or unreasonable, don’t delay — time limits are strict, and early legal intervention can make all the difference.
Contact Salam Immigration today to book a confidential consultation with one of our specialists.
Let us review your case, explain your options, and help you take the right legal steps towards justice.