News

Duncan Lewis’s Public Law team has secured an important Court of Appeal victory for unaccompanied child refugees seeking the right to reunite with their parents and siblings.

On 8 October 2025, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in DM v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 1273.

Duncan Lewis represented DM, an Eritrean refugee who arrived in the UK as a child, in a judicial review challenging the Home Secretary’s family reunion policy. Under the policy in force at the time, unaccompanied refugee children were not permitted to be reunited with their parents or siblings, except in exceptional circumstances. By contrast, adults granted refugee status were entitled to apply for family reunion with their spouses and children.

DM applied to the High Court for judicial review on the basis that (1) the Home Secretary was in breach of section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 to have regard to the best interests of children in the UK, (2) the effect of the policy was to discriminate against unaccompanied asylum-seeking children in their enjoyment of the right to family life, and (3) the policy was irrational in public law terms. The High Court refused DM’s application for judicial review, DM appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal (Underhill LJ, Newey LJ, and Lewis LJ) held that the Home Secretary had breached her duty under section 55 of the 2009 Act to have regard to the best interests of children, because in 2009 when Section 55 came into force, she had failed to consider whether her family reunion policy had regard to the best interests of children, and she had not conducted a substantive review of the policy in line with Section 55 at any point since then. The Court held that the Secretary of State is now obliged to conduct a section 55 review of her family reunion policy as it relates to child refugees.

The Court of Appeal also held that the High Court had erred in finding that the Home Secretary had not treated child refugees and adult refugees differently, and in failing therefore to consider whether that differential treatment was justified.  

Jeremy Bloom, Solicitor for DM in the Court of Appeal proceedings said:

This judgment comes at a crucial time, as the Home Secretary has paused all family reunion applications so that she can review her policy. The Court of Appeal has made it clear that the Secretary of State’s existing policy on family reunion is unlawful, and that she will have to consider the best interests of the child in her review of the policy. The Court also found that treating refugee children less favourably than refugee adults for the purpose of family reunion does constitute differential treatment and could well also constitute unlawful discrimination if the Secretary of State cannot justify it. The Court noted its surprise that the Secretary of State had filed no witness statement or other evidence in support of her position that differential treatment was justified, and that evidence will be crucial if she is going to put in place a new policy which treats child refugees in accordance with the law.

DM was represented by Toufique Hossain, Sulaiha Ali, Jeremy Bloom and Manini Menon. Counsel instructed were Raza Husain KC and Eleanor Mitchell of Matrix Chambers, and Jason Pobjoy KC of Blackstone Chambers. 

Read the full judgement here

Giving People a Voice

The Public Law team at Duncan Lewis is one of the largest in the UK, specialising in judicial review and civil liberties work. The team regularly acts in high-profile challenges involving immigration detention, asylum support, and human rights, representing some of the most vulnerable individuals in society.

Duncan Lewis Solicitors is a multi-award-winning national law firm, committed to access to justice and providing specialist advice and representation in legal aid and privately funded matters. The firm’s dedication to defending the rights of marginalised and at-risk individuals continues to achieve meaningful outcomes and systemic change.