R (on the application of Tazeem) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0072

Parties

Appellant(s)

Hammad Tazeem

Respondent(s)

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Issue

Was the Appellant’s detention prior to the cancellation of his leave to enter lawful because the Immigration Officers held a statutory power to detain for the purpose of examination?

Facts

The Appellant is a national of Pakistan. On 3 September 2022, aged 19, he was granted leave to enter the UK and remain for a university course of study. On 9th September 2022, he arrived in London Heathrow Airport. At 20:16 hours, the Appellant was interviewed by a Border Force desk officer. The interview concluded at 21:30 hours. The officer was concerned that his ability to speak English was not good enough for him to be a student. He was referred to be examined by further officers. The Appellant was interviewed again at 23:43 hours on the same day. The Appellant requested an Urdu interpreter. He was asked several questions about his proposed degree course and his English language tests. The interview concluded at 00:49 hours on 10th September. The Border Force officers concluded that the Appellant should be served with notices cancelling his leave to enter. The relevant decision was made at some time between 01:15 and 02:32 hours on the morning of 10th September. The Appellant was informed of the decision at 03:15 hours. The notice to cancel recorded that the Appellant “falsely represented” himself to the Entry Clearance in order to obtain his student visa and that the officer had “doubts about the authenticity of the English tests”. Removal directions were set for 15:05 hours on the same day. Within a few hours, the Appellant instructed solicitors, a letter before claim was sent, removal directions were cancelled, and the Appellant was released later that afternoon. On 12th September 2022, judicial review proceedings were commenced against the Secretary of State for the Home Department. The Deputy High Court judge held that the decision to cancel the Appellant’s leave was procedurally unfair and therefore unlawful. This is because the Border Force officers never put clearly to the Appellant their doubts about the authenticity of his English language authentication. However, the judge held that the Appellant’s detention was lawful. The Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal (CA) on the lawfulness of his detention. The CA held that the Appellant’s detention for examination was lawful until the decision was made that his leave should be cancelled. Thereafter, because the decision to cancel the Appellant’s leave was unlawful, the detention for the purposes of removal was unlawful. The Appellant now seeks permission to appeal to the UK Supreme Court from the CA’s conclusion that the detention for examination was lawful.

Date of issue

25 April 2025

Case origin

PTA

Back to top