Since sponsorship began in 2008, a large number of sponsors have had their sponsor licences revoked. Some have brought a legal challenge, but the vast majority of those have failed. It is therefore always of interest when such a challenge, known as a judicial review, succeeds.
In the recent case of R (New Hope Care Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWHC 1270 (Admin), the claimant, a care home operator, launched judicial review proceedings following the decision to revoke its sponsor licence, citing four grounds.
Whilst three of the grounds were dismissed – irrationality, misdirection as to meaning of policy, and global assessment – the challenge succeeded on the ground of procedural impropriety.
Unusual circumstances
The facts of the case pertaining to the procedural impropriety ground are quite unusual. When the Home Office suspended the licence in August 2023, it explained in the suspension letter that further details would be provided once its investigation was complete. The sponsor would then have 20 working days to provide a response.
The Authorising Officer had been detained in Zimbabwe during the run-up to the revocation decision and was therefore unable to be present for an initial, or subsequent, Home Office compliance visit. He had however been in communication with the Home Office which had agreed to reschedule the second compliance visit when he had returned to the UK.
Revocation
The re-arranged compliance review did not take place. Instead, on 6 October 2023 the Home Office notified the sponsor of its decision to revoke the licence.
Several allegations of failure to comply with the sponsor’s duties were included in the revocation letter. These included the fact that the authorising officer was not based in the UK, along with failures in relation to pay and right to work checks.
Failure to follow procedure
The High Court ruled that the Home Office had failed to follow the procedure as set out in its suspension letter and guidance, to provide sponsors with 20 working days to respond to specific allegations. It also ruled that there is a fundamental ‘common law right to be heard before important benefits are taken away’.
Does the Home Office need to consider the wider impacts of revocation?
The sponsor had alleged that the Home Office had failed to carry out a global assessment of the impact of the revocation of its licence on its employees, their families, and care receivers. In doing so, it cited the cases of Prestwick Care and Supporting Care, two cases in which conflicting decisions on this issue were reached.
The court in this case concluded that such factors could not undermine the Home Office’s ability to revoke a licence.
Although the court in Supporting Care found otherwise, the circumstances surrounding that particular decision (principally that it is unlikely that the court was aware of the Prestwick Care decision) mean that it is likely that the Secretary of State is confident that the outcome will be overturned by the Court of Appeal.
How our Immigration Solicitors can help
We provide specialist legal advice and support in the area of business immigration. Our immigration solicitors are experienced in assisting sponsors who are facing compliance action in the form of sponsor licence suspensions and revocations.
We understand that compliance action causes significant disruption to UK businesses, and we specialise in assisting businesses through this difficult time. If you require legal assistance or would just like to discuss your situation with one of our experts please contact us or complete our enquiry form below.
