Duncan Lewis Secures Upper Tribunal Victory Against National Age Assessment Board (14 July 2026)

The Public Law team at Duncan Lewis Solicitors has secured a significant Upper Tribunal challenge to an unlawful age assessment carried out by the National Age Assessment Board (NAAB). The Tribunal confirmed that our client, an Eritrean refugee and recognised victim of modern slavery, was a child, not an adult, when he arrived in the UK.

In R (BSB) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR-2025-LON-003816), the Upper Tribunal quashed the Home Secretary's decision, made through the National Age Assessment Board, which had incorrectly concluded that the claimant was an adult.

The Tribunal accepted that the claimant was born on 14 April 2007, confirming that he was 16 years old when he arrived in the UK in March 2024. He is now entitled to support as a former looked after child.

Background

The claimant was born in Eritrea before fleeing with his mother to Ethiopia as a refugee at the age of three. Following his mother's death when he was 14 years old, he travelled through Sudan and Libya in search of safety.

While in Libya, he became a victim of trafficking after being separated from those travelling with him. He was forced to undertake construction work and suffered physical abuse at the hands of traffickers, who also targeted him because of his Orthodox Christian faith. With the help of two Eritrean adults, he eventually escaped Libya and travelled through Italy, France and Belgium before arriving in the UK.

On arrival in the UK, immigration officers assessed him to be 26 years old based solely on his appearance and demeanour. A subsequent assessment by the London Borough of Hillingdon also concluded that he was an adult, but this assessment was later withdrawn after it was accepted that it failed to comply with the principles established in R (B) v Merton London Borough Council [2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin).

The claimant was then referred to the National Age Assessment Board, which concluded that he had been born in February 2005 and was therefore an adult.

During the age assessment process, the claimant was recognised as a refugee by the Home Office and received a positive Conclusive Grounds decision confirming that he was a victim of modern slavery.

Represented by Jamie Bell, Solicitor, and Anya Mohammed, Caseworker, of Duncan Lewis Solicitors, who instructed Helen Foot of Garden Court Chambers, the claimant challenged the NAAB's decision by way of judicial review.

Upper Tribunal Findings

On behalf of the claimant, the team argued that the National Age Assessment Board had failed to properly assess the available evidence and had placed undue weight on minor and peripheral inconsistencies while overlooking significant factors supporting the claimant's account.

The Upper Tribunal agreed and found that insufficient regard had been given to:

• the claimant's explanation for providing an incorrect adult date of birth while in Dunkirk and under the influence of adults;
• the fact that significant aspects of his account had already been accepted as credible during both his asylum and modern slavery claims; and
• the consistency with which he had maintained his claimed date of birth since arriving in the UK.

The Tribunal also rejected the Secretary of State's argument that age assessments undertaken by the National Age Assessment Board should be afforded greater weight than those carried out by local authorities, finding there was no legal authority to support such an approach.

The London Borough of Hillingdon participated in the proceedings as an Interested Party. Although it had initially assessed the claimant as an adult, it had accommodated and supported him under the Children Act 1989 since June 2025 pursuant to an order granting interim relief.

Significance of the Judgment

This judgment reinforces the importance of ensuring that age assessments are conducted fairly, lawfully and on the basis of all relevant evidence. It confirms that decision-makers must look beyond appearance, demeanour or isolated inconsistencies and instead undertake a careful and holistic assessment of the evidence before reaching a conclusion.

The decision also clarifies that there is no legal basis for according greater weight to age assessments carried out by the National Age Assessment Board than those undertaken by local authorities. Each assessment must be evaluated on its own merits and in accordance with established legal principles.

For young asylum seekers, an incorrect age assessment can have life-changing consequences, affecting access to appropriate accommodation, safeguarding, education and specialist support. This judgment highlights the vital importance of robust legal scrutiny where vulnerable children have been wrongly assessed as adults.

Comment

Jamie Bell, Solicitor in the Public Law department at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, said:

"This case demonstrates the profound impact that an incorrect age assessment can have on a vulnerable young person's safety and wellbeing. Children who have fled persecution, trafficking and exploitation are entitled to assessments that are fair, lawful and grounded in all of the available evidence.

We are pleased that the Upper Tribunal recognised the shortcomings in the National Age Assessment Board's decision-making process and confirmed our client's true age. This judgment serves as an important reminder that credibility findings made during asylum and modern slavery decision-making, together with the wider evidence, must be properly considered when assessing age and that traumatised young people should be given the appropriate benefit of the doubt."

How We Can Help

Duncan Lewis Solicitors has extensive experience representing children, young people, asylum seekers and victims of trafficking, including in:

• Age assessment challenges and judicial review of NAAB and local authority decisions
• Asylum and protection claims
• Modern slavery and trafficking cases, including Conclusive Grounds decisions

If you or someone you support has been wrongly assessed as an adult, or needs advice on an asylum, trafficking or public law matter, our specialist team is here to help.

To speak to our Public Law team, call us on 033 3772 0409 or click here to submit an online enquiry.

About the Team

Jamie Bell is a Solicitor in the Public Law and Immigration department at Duncan Lewis Solicitors. He specialises in complex judicial review, asylum and human rights claims, with particular expertise in representing vulnerable asylum seekers, victims of trafficking and age-disputed young people.

Anya Mohammed is a Caseworker in the Public Law department at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, assisting on a wide range of judicial review matters. She has particular experience in cases involving age-disputed young people, asylum and resettlement schemes, and works closely with vulnerable clients to support complex public law challenges.