Home Office Grants Asylum for Vulnerable Client After Judicial Review Challenge (23 April 2026)

Duncan Lewis Solicitors successfully secured asylum for a vulnerable young client after challenging an unlawful Home Office refusal through judicial review. Following the Upper Tribunal granting permission, the Home Office agreed to withdraw its decision and grant full refugee status. 

Background

Our client, MA (name anonymised), is an Iranian national of Kurdish ethnicity who arrived in the United Kingdom as a vulnerable 17-year-old in November 2021. He had fled severe sexual abuse, domestic violence, and persecution linked to his conversion to Christianity.

Despite extensive medical evidence confirming PTSD and depression, and supporting testimony, his asylum claim was refused by the Home Office in December 2023. 

Procedural History

MA appealed to the First-tier Tribunal. In March 2025, the Home Office indicated that its refusal was “no longer appropriate” and that refugee status would be granted. Relying on this assurance, MA agreed to the withdrawal of his appeal.

However, despite repeated follow-ups—and even written acknowledgment from a senior caseworker that refugee leave should have been granted—the Home Office issued a fresh refusal in August 2025, containing even more serious errors than the original decision.

We issued a pre-action protocol letter, but the Home Office declined to reverse its position. Judicial review proceedings were therefore initiated swiftly, alongside a new appeal to the First Tier Tribunal. 

Judicial Review Challenge

We initiated judicial review proceedings on two main grounds:

• Legitimate Expectation: The Home Office’s March 2025 correspondence constituted a clear and unambiguous promise that MA would be granted refugee status. MA relied on this promise to his detriment by withdrawing his appeal. No lawful justification was provided for the subsequent contradictory refusal.

• Unlawful Delay and Article 8 Breach: MA was left in legal limbo for nearly four years despite being a highly vulnerable young person with serious mental health conditions. The prolonged uncertainty, inability to work, and ongoing instability amounted to a disproportionate interference with his private life.

The Upper Tribunal granted permission for the judicial review to proceed, recognising the strength of the claim.

Outcome

Following this, the Home Office agreed to settle the case by withdrawing its refusal and granting MA asylum.

This outcome represents complete vindication of our client’s position. It ensures that MA, who arrived in the UK as a traumatised minor, can finally rebuild his life in safety and stability. 

Why This Case Matters

This case demonstrates the importance of judicial review in holding the Home Office accountable and ensuring that vulnerable individuals are not left unprotected due to flawed or inconsistent decision-making. It also highlights the importance of robust legal representation in challenging decisions that fail to meet the requirements of fairness, consistency, and due process.

We represented MA at every stage of his case – from his initial asylum claim and both appeals through to judicial review – securing a life-changing outcome. 

Legal Team

MA was represented by Gemma Lynch, Immigration and Public Law Director, instructing Sandra Akinbolu from the 36 Group as counsel. 

About Gemma Lynch – Director & Solicitor 

Gemma Lynch is a Director in the Immigration department at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, with over 10 years’ experience in immigration, asylum, and public law matters. She represents both privately funded and legally aided clients, with particular expertise in complex asylum claims and judicial review challenges. Gemma is especially experienced in representing vulnerable individuals, including unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, and has a strong track record of successful appeals in the First-tier and Upper Tribunal.