Refugee And Migrant Forum of Essex And London & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWCA Civ 86 (17 February 2026)

Refugee And Migrant Forum of Essex And London & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWCA Civ 86 (17 February 2026)

The appeal was allowed because the claimants failed to identify the specific decision challenged under section 55, causing prejudice to the Secretary of State. The order below was defective as it declared unlawfulness in the substantive outcome rather than the process. Even if section 55 applied, it was unlikely that a different decision would have been made, and the Secretary of State was prejudiced by the defective pleading.

Citation
[2026] EWCA Civ 86
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Refugee and Migrant Forum of Essex and London; Claimant/respondent: Cecilia Adjei; Appellant/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Adjourned Ground
Outcome
Appeal allowed on ground 2; order below set aside to that extent.
Legal Topics
Section 3 C Leave, E Visas, Section 55 Duty, Best Interests of Children, Judicial Review Procedure, Relief and Remedies
Immigration Law Administrative Law Public Law Section 3 C Leave E Visas Section 55 Duty Best Interests of Children Judicial Review Procedure +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Refugee and Migrant Forum of Essex and London

Claimant/respondent

Cecilia Adjei

Claimant/respondent

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Adjourned Ground

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State breached section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 by failing to have regard to the best interests of children in the roll-out of eVisas to migrants on section 3C leave
  2. 2 Whether the claimants' failure to plead a specific decision was fatal to the section 55 claim
  3. 3 Whether relief should be refused under section 31(2A) of the Senior Courts Act 1981

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the claimants failed to identify the specific decision challenged under section 55, causing prejudice to the Secretary of State. The order below was defective as it declared unlawfulness in the substantive outcome rather than the process. Even if section 55 applied, it was unlikely that a different decision would have been made, and the Secretary of State was prejudiced by the defective pleading.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed on ground 2; order below set aside to that extent.

Orders

  • Declaration below set aside as defective; no relief granted on section 55 ground.