Divisional Court Rules on Home Office Good Character Citizenship Policy (6 July 2026)

The Divisional Court has handed down judgment in R (Alibiari) v the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWHC 1623 (Admin). The claimant, represented by Duncan Lewis Solicitors, challenged version 6 of the Home Office's 'Nationality: Good Character Requirement' policy, which was in force between 13 February 2025 and 29 April 2026.

The policy provided that applications for British citizenship from individuals whom the Secretary of State considered to have entered the UK illegally or arrived irregularly following a dangerous journey would normally be refused on the basis that they did not satisfy the good character requirement. However, it offered very limited guidance to decision-makers on the circumstances in which citizenship should nevertheless be granted, particularly where an individual could not reasonably be held responsible for entering the UK illegally or making a dangerous journey.

At the time of the hearing, the policy under challenge by the Claimant had already been withdrawn by the Home Office, and replaced by a revised version 7, which contains more guidance on the circumstances in which illegal entry or a dangerous journey may be outweighed for the purpose of the Home Office’s assessment of whether an individual is of good character. Version 7 of the policy now contains instructions to decision-makers in relation to children, victims of trafficking and refugees who would have a defence to illegal entry under section 31 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. The changes to the policy responded in part to the grounds of challenge brought by the Claimant and we consider that the policy was likely to have been amended in response to this and other judicial review claims challenging its lawfulness.

The Claimant challenged the policy on three grounds. The first ground argued that the policy directed caseworkers to take unlawful decisions because it failed to recognise that a refugee may not bear any moral responsibility for the circumstances that caused him to enter the UK illegally. The Divisional Court, while accepting that there may be cases where a person could be said not to be responsible for the fact they entered the UK illegally (para 36), held that the policy was not unlawful because the possibility that a person may lack responsibility did not need to be included in the description of circumstances when illegal entry would normally indicate a lack of good character (para 42).

Ground 2 and 3 concerned discrimination under Article 14 ECHR and a breach of the public sector equality duty. The court rejected those arguments.

The Claimant intends to seek permission to appeal the decision.

For those who are planning to make an application for citizenship, they will now be able to do so under the current more favourable version of the Good Character policy. If you made your application under Version 6 of the policy, and have received a refusal or a refusal on reconsideration, then we urge you to seek legal advice.

The claim was linked to be heard with a number of claims from individuals represented by Wilson Solicitors LLP, but those claims were withdrawn on the day of the hearing.

Duncan Lewis is grateful for the witness evidence in support of the claim provided by After Exploitation, Refugee Action, Women Against Rape and the Anti-Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit.

The team at Duncan Lewis Solicitors were Toufique Hossain, Jeremy Bloom, Ben Nelson, Kristen Allison and Thomas Munns. Counsel instructed were Alex Goodman KC and Charles Bishop, at Landmark Chambers.

Read the full judgement here: R (Alibiari) v the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWHC 1623 (Admin)

Find full details of this case on Bailii’s website here.