Navigating the complexities of Applying for Judicial Review UK can be challenging, especially when faced with an unfavourable decision from the Home Office. One of the legal remedies available is a judicial review, a process that allows individuals to challenge the lawfulness of a decision or action taken by a public body. However, initiating a judicial review requires strict adherence to specific time limits and procedural steps, notably the Pre-action Protocol.
What are the Judicial Review Time Limits in UK Immigration Cases
Understanding the strict time limits for initiating a judicial review is crucial. In immigration matters, these deadlines are significantly shorter than in other areas of administrative law. Missing a deadline can render your case inadmissible, regardless of its merit.
General Rule for Judicial Review Time Limits
According to Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) Part 54, a judicial review application must be filed:
- Promptly; and
- In any event, not later than three months after the grounds to make the claim first arose.
However, immigration cases are treated with heightened urgency.
Shortened Time Limit for Immigration Judicial Review
Under CPR 54.5(5), if the judicial review relates to a decision made under the Immigration Acts, the deadline is within 16 days after the decision was made. This was further clarified under Practice Direction 54A and subsequent case law.
For urgent removals or deportation cases, the time frame may be even tighter. Applicants may need to act within 7 days or less, especially when removal directions are set.
Key Points to Remember
- The “clock” starts when the decision is received or communicated to the applicant, not when legal advice is first sought.
- Extensions to these deadlines are rarely granted and only under compelling circumstances.
- Delay can be interpreted as acceptance of the decision, weakening your case even if eventually filed.
Consequences of Missing the Deadline
Failure to adhere to time limits almost always results in the court refusing permission to proceed. In rare cases where an extension is sought, the applicant must prove:
- A good reason for the delay,
- That no prejudice was caused to the other party,
- That it is still in the public interest to review the decision.
Best Practice Tip
Start preparing for judicial review immediately upon receiving a refusal decision. Delays can undermine even the strongest claims.
What is The Pre-action Protocol in Judicial Review
Before commencing a judicial review, claimants are expected—except in urgent cases—to follow the Pre-action Protocol (PAP). This protocol is a formal step that gives the public body a chance to reconsider its decision, potentially avoiding litigation altogether.
What is the Pre-action Protocol?
The Pre-action Protocol for judicial review is outlined in the Practice Direction—Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols and is further supported by the Administrative Court Guide. It aims to:
- Promote early and full communication between parties;
- Provide a clear understanding of the issues;
- Enable the public body to reconsider and potentially reverse its decision;
- Narrow the grounds of dispute;
- Avoid unnecessary litigation.
The Letter Before Claim
The central component of the PAP is the Letter Before Claim (LBC), which must be sent to the proposed defendant (usually the Home Office) and should include:
- The claimant’s name and contact details;
- The details of the immigration decision being challenged;
- A clear summary of the legal grounds for the challenge;
- The facts relied upon;
- A request for disclosure of relevant documents;
- A proposed deadline (normally 14 days) for a response.
Important Considerations
- The LBC should be sent as soon as possible, well before the judicial review time limit expires.
- It must be clear, precise, and legally sound.
- It should be sent by a reliable method that confirms delivery, such as recorded post or email (where applicable).
When Can You Skip the PAP?
In urgent cases—such as imminent removal from the UK—it may not be practical to follow the full Pre-action Protocol. In these instances, an application for urgent judicial review can be made directly, explaining why the PAP step was omitted.
However, bypassing the protocol without justification can result in:
- The claim being stayed or dismissed;
- Adverse costs orders;
- Judicial criticism of the claimant’s conduct.
Legal Weight of the Protocol
While the Pre-action Protocol is not legally binding, courts take it seriously. Non-compliance can undermine the credibility of a case and impact costs. The protocol aligns with the Overriding Objective of the CPR: to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost.
How to Prepare a Strong Judicial Review Application
A well-prepared judicial review application can be the difference between permission being granted or refused at the initial stage. Immigration judicial reviews are subject to a two-stage process: permission and substantive hearing. Most applications fail at the permission stage due to poor preparation or lack of legal merit.
Stage 1: Permission to Apply
Before the full judicial review hearing, the court must first grant permission. This is not a mere formality. The applicant must demonstrate:
- An arguable case with a realistic prospect of success;
- That they have standing (i.e. are directly affected by the decision);
- That there is no alternative remedy (e.g. statutory appeal or reconsideration);
- That the claim is brought in time.
Failure to meet any of these criteria will result in refusal at the permission stage.
Common Grounds for Judicial Review
Some of the most frequently used grounds include:
- Illegality: The decision-maker acted beyond their legal powers.
- Irrationality: The decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would have made it.
- Procedural Impropriety: There was a failure to follow a fair procedure (e.g. lack of notice, bias).
- Breach of Legitimate Expectation: Where the Home Office failed to honour a promised procedure or policy.
- Human Rights Violations: Breaches of rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 or international obligations.
Stage 2: Substantive Hearing (if permission is granted)
If permission is granted, the matter proceeds to a full hearing, where both sides argue the case. The court does not revisit facts or act as an appeal body—it simply assesses whether the decision was lawful.
Drafting the Claim Form and Grounds
Your claim form must be accompanied by:
- A Statement of Facts and Grounds explaining the legal basis of your claim;
- Supporting documents (bundle), including the refusal letter and all relevant correspondence;
- A Skeleton Argument, which outlines the points you will argue in court;
- An Acknowledgement of Service (from the Home Office), once served.
Evidence and Supporting Documents
While judicial review focuses on legality rather than merits, the following evidence can support your case:
- The original immigration decision and supporting letters;
- Correspondence with the Home Office;
- Any relevant case law or statutory instruments;
- Evidence demonstrating the consequences of the decision (e.g. medical records, family ties, risk in country of origin).
Legal Representation
Judicial review is a complex area of law. While it is possible to represent yourself, expert legal advice from an immigration solicitor or barrister significantly improves your chances of success.
Application Fees and Funding
As of the latest updates:
- Application for permission: £154
- If permission is granted and the case proceeds: additional £385
Applicants on low income may be eligible for legal aid or fee remission, but these are subject to strict criteria.
Urgent Judicial Review Applications and Interim Relief
In UK immigration law, certain situations require immediate judicial intervention. For example, if an individual is facing imminent removal or deportation, the urgency of the matter may necessitate filing a judicial review application without delay—and sometimes without completing the Pre-action Protocol.
What Is an Urgent Judicial Review?
An urgent judicial review is an expedited application asking the court to intervene before a removal, deportation, or other irreversible action occurs. The applicant must:
- Clearly mark the application as urgent;
- Provide compelling reasons for urgency;
- Include evidence of the deadline (e.g., removal directions);
- Request interim relief if necessary.
What Is Interim Relief?
Interim relief is a temporary court order that suspends the effect of the decision being challenged until the judicial review is fully resolved. In immigration cases, this often means asking the court to:
- Stay the removal from the UK;
- Prevent enforcement action;
- Maintain the applicant’s access to benefits or accommodation.
The court assesses whether to grant interim relief based on:
- Whether there is a serious issue to be tried;
- Whether damages would be an adequate remedy;
- Where the balance of convenience lies;
- The public interest.
How to Apply for Urgent Relief
To make an urgent application, you must:
- File the judicial review claim form;
- Include a separate application for interim relief (Form N463);
- Provide a detailed statement of urgency;
- Highlight relevant evidence (e.g. airline tickets, removal notice, medical risks);
- Email the documents to the Administrative Court Office with a request for urgent consideration.
The court will often deal with urgent cases within 24 to 48 hours. However, outcomes vary depending on the strength of the case and the clarity of evidence presented.
Key Risks and Responsibilities
While urgent judicial review is a vital tool, it is not without risks:
- Frivolous or late applications may be refused outright.
- Applicants could face cost orders if the court finds no legal merit.
- Poorly drafted claims may undermine future litigation opportunities.
Legal advisers must act swiftly and ensure the application is thorough, focused, and fully evidenced.
Strategic Use of Urgency
Not all “urgent” situations qualify for expedited treatment. Courts expect genuine urgency, not a delay caused by poor planning. If you’re facing removal, it’s vital to seek legal advice immediately—do not wait until removal directions are served.
How Courts Assess Permission and Grounds in Judicial Review
Securing permission to proceed with a judicial review is a crucial hurdle. You will need a strong Judicial Review Planning Claim to ensure only those with arguable legal merit proceed to a full hearing. In UK immigration law, where judicial reviews are frequently used to challenge Home Office decisions, understanding the criteria the courts apply is essential.
The Permission Stage: A Legal Filter
At this stage, the judge reviews the documents on paper, without a hearing unless specifically requested. The goal is to assess whether:
- The claim raises an arguable ground;
- There is a realistic prospect of success;
- The issue is one that falls within the court’s jurisdiction;
- The claim has been filed in time;
- The claimant has standing and no alternative remedy.
If any of these thresholds are not met, permission is refused.
Realistic vs. Fanciful
A claim must be more than merely arguable; it must have a real—not fanciful—chance of succeeding. This is a low threshold, but not a symbolic one. Unsupported allegations, vague arguments, or complaints based on fairness rather than legality are typically rejected.
Grounds Most Likely to Succeed
While success depends on case-specific facts, the most persuasive grounds usually involve:
- Legal error: Misapplication of immigration rules or incorrect statutory interpretation;
- Failure to consider relevant evidence;
- Breach of natural justice: Denial of an opportunity to respond or present evidence;
- Human rights violations: Particularly under Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (e.g. right to private and family life);
- Proportionality: Especially in deportation and removal cases involving children or long-term UK residents.
The Role of the Acknowledgment of Service
Once a claim is filed, the Home Office (or other respondent) submits an Acknowledgment of Service within 21 days. This includes:
- A summary of its position;
- The legal basis for defending the decision;
- A brief response to each ground raised.
Judges consider this response when deciding whether permission should be granted. If the Home Office fails to respond, the court may view the claim more favourably.
Oral Renewals: One More Shot
If permission is refused on paper, the claimant has the right to request an oral renewal hearing. This must be done within 7 days of refusal and is often the final opportunity to convince a judge of the claim’s merit. Oral renewals must:
- Focus on clear, structured arguments;
- Address the judge’s reasons for refusal;
- Highlight any procedural or factual errors in the initial assessment.
Legal representation is almost always necessary at this stage due to the complexity and strategic importance of the hearing.
Common Reasons for Refusal
- Delay or missed deadlines;
- Poorly drafted or vague grounds;
- Failure to comply with Pre-action Protocol;
- Lack of legal basis (complaints rather than legal claims);
- Existence of an alternative statutory remedy;
- Weak or speculative human rights arguments.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is judicial review in the context of UK immigration?
Judicial review is a legal procedure by which individuals can challenge the lawfulness of a decision made by a public body, such as the Home Office. In immigration cases, a judicial review does not examine whether the decision was fair or right on the merits, but whether it was lawful. It provides a remedy when there is no right of appeal or when appeal routes have been exhausted.
When should I apply for a judicial review in immigration matters?
You should consider applying for a judicial review if:
- You have received a decision from the Home Office with no right of appeal;
- You believe the decision was unlawful, unreasonable, procedurally unfair, or breached your human rights;
- You acted promptly and are still within the strict judicial review time limits (e.g. 16 days for most immigration decisions).
Delay in pursuing judicial review is often fatal to your case.
Is there a deadline for judicial review in immigration cases?
Yes. The general rule for judicial review time limits is that you must file your claim:
- Promptly; and
- In any event, within three months of the date when grounds for the claim first arose.
However, in immigration cases, the time limit is much shorter—typically 16 days from the date of the decision. For some urgent cases, such as removals, you may have as little as 72 hours or even 24 hours to act.
Failure to comply with judicial review time limits almost always results in refusal of permission to proceed.
Do I need to follow the Pre-action Protocol before judicial review?
Yes, unless your case is urgent. The Pre-action Protocol is a mandatory step before filing a judicial review claim. It involves sending a Letter Before Claim to the Home Office explaining why the decision is being challenged and asking for a response within a set timeframe (usually 14 days).
The Pre-action Protocol is designed to:
- Promote early resolution without litigation;
- Narrow the issues for the judicial review;
- Avoid unnecessary court proceedings.
Skipping this step without a valid reason may result in your claim being stayed or even dismissed.
What happens if the Home Office doesn’t respond to the Pre-action Protocol letter?
If the Home Office fails to respond to your Pre-action Protocol letter within the deadline, you may proceed with your judicial review application. However, you should document the lack of response and include it in your claim bundle.
Courts may view the Home Office’s silence unfavourably, but this does not automatically guarantee permission for judicial review.
What are the main grounds for judicial review in immigration?
The most common legal grounds for judicial review include:
- Illegality: The Home Office acted beyond its legal powers.
- Irrationality: The decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable decision-maker could have made it.
- Procedural unfairness: The decision-making process was unfair (e.g. no opportunity to present evidence).
- Breach of human rights: The decision violates rights protected under the Human Rights Act 1998 or international law.
- Breach of legitimate expectation: The Home Office failed to follow its published policies or promises.
Each judicial review claim must be supported by clear facts and legal arguments to succeed.
Can I stay in the UK while my judicial review is being decided?
In many cases, yes. If you apply for judicial review before removal or deportation, and request interim relief (e.g. a stay on removal), the court may temporarily halt enforcement while your case is considered.
However, this is not automatic. You must:
- Request interim relief clearly;
- Provide strong reasons and supporting evidence;
- File your judicial review application before the removal deadline.
Acting promptly and seeking legal advice early is essential.
How long does a judicial review take?
The timeline varies depending on the complexity of the judicial review, urgency, and court workload. A typical immigration judicial review process may follow this timeline:
- Pre-action Protocol: 14 days (unless urgent)
- Permission stage: 3 to 6 months
- Substantive hearing: An additional 6 to 9 months after permission is granted
Urgent judicial review applications (e.g. removal cases) may be considered within days or weeks.
What are the possible outcomes of a judicial review?
If successful, a judicial review can result in:
- Quashing order: The decision is overturned and must be reconsidered lawfully.
- Mandatory order: The Home Office is directed to act (e.g. process an application).
- Prohibiting order: The Home Office is prohibited from taking unlawful action.
If unsuccessful, the judicial review will be dismissed, and you may face legal costs.
What happens if I lose a judicial review?
If you lose your judicial review case:
- You may be liable to pay the Home Office’s legal costs;
- There are limited options for appeal, usually only if there was a serious legal error in the decision;
- It may affect future immigration applications or proceedings.
Appealing a judicial review refusal is difficult and only possible in cases involving fundamental legal issues.
Can I apply for legal aid for judicial review?
Yes, legal aid is available for judicial review in immigration matters, but it is means-tested and subject to a merits assessment. You must:
- Have low income and limited assets;
- Show that the case has legal merit;
- Demonstrate that the judicial review is a necessary and proportionate response.
Not all law firms offer legal aid for immigration judicial review, so ensure your legal representative is authorised.
Do I need a solicitor for judicial review?
Technically, you can represent yourself, but judicial review is legally and procedurally complex. Immigration judicial reviews often involve:
- Sophisticated legal arguments;
- Tightly framed deadlines;
- High evidentiary standards.
Engaging an experienced immigration solicitor significantly increases your chances of success and ensures compliance with court requirements.
Can judicial review be used for delays by the Home Office?
Yes. A judicial review can be used to challenge unreasonable delays by the Home Office, particularly where:
- The delay exceeds published timelines;
- It affects your legal rights or status in the UK;
- You have sent reminders and received no meaningful response.
These are known as “delay judicial reviews” and can lead to a court order compelling the Home Office to act.
Take Action with Salam Immigration
If you believe you’ve received an unlawful immigration decision or you’re facing removal without proper legal grounds, don’t wait. Time limits for judicial review are strict, and delay can cost you your chance to fight back.
At Salam Immigration, we specialise in complex judicial review cases—especially those involving urgent immigration decisions, human rights concerns, and Home Office refusals that appear arbitrary or procedurally flawed.
