Here, we take a look at the recent judgment on the case of R (on the application of Ancy Lazer Salu Andrews) v Secretary of State for Home Department (2025), and what it could mean for Skilled Workers.
We have frequently seen Skilled Workers question whether they can undertake additional jobs or roles. The rules surrounding supplementary employment changed in 2024, but there have been allowances to undertake voluntary work. However, we have seen an increase in civil penalties being issued, or in more extreme cases and repeat offences, bans being issued upon company directors, for what they consider to be illegal work, rather than voluntary work.
The case of Andrews v Secretary of State for Home Department (2025) clarifies what would be considered work and what would be considered volunteering.
Facts of the case
Skilled Workers can undertake secondary work, also known as ‘supplementary employment’, outside of their normal hours of work. This must be in a role that is eligible for sponsorship and that has a suitable occupation code.
In addition, Skilled Workers can undertake “voluntary work”, allowing unpaid work in any sector. The Sponsor Guidance sets out that:
“The applicant can do voluntary work in any sector. They must not be paid or receive other money for the voluntary work, except reasonable expenses as described in section 44 of the National Minimum Wage Act.”
The Claimant, Ms Andrews, was an Indian national who entered the UK as a Skilled Worker (under the Health and Care route) on 08 June 2023. Ms Andrews was found working at the Charlton Convenience Store, serving customers behind the counter by Immigration Enforcement. This was not a role eligible for sponsorship, and therefore could not be considered as supplementary employment and was classed as illegal working under the Immigration Act 1971.
A ‘No Action Notice’ was issued, as the owner of the Charlton Convenience Store stated to the Civil Penalty Compliance Team that Ms Andrews was a volunteer, and therefore was not undertaking supplementary work.
However, a few months later in November 2023, after an internal review, Ms Andrews was found to have been in contravention of her visa conditions, and her permission as a Skilled Worker was cancelled. Ms Andrews applied for a Judicial Review of the decision.
Defining the term ‘voluntary work’
The Secretary of State argued that Ms Andrews’ work at the Charlton Convenience Store could not, and did not, constitute the definition of “voluntary work”, as listed in section 44 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998, as she was not carrying out work for an associated fund-raising body, a charity, a voluntary organisation or a statutory body.
The High Court of Justice reviewed a number of statutory provisions, as well as previous relevant case law, before coming to a conclusion on the judicial review case.
It was held that any statutory provisions (specifically the Immigration Rules and the National Minimum Wage Act 1998) should always take precedence over any Home Office guidance.
The terminology used in the Immigration Rules regarding “voluntary work” should have always been interpreted in line with section 44 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.
Sections 44(1) to 44(4) of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 define the scenarios in which voluntary work can be undertaken. These include work for an associated fund-raising body, a charity, a voluntary organisation or a statutory body. The statutory definition does not include simply any form of unpaid work.
Ms Andrews was found by Immigration Enforcement working at the Charlton Convenience Store in a commercial premises which did not fit the statutory definition of a place of voluntary work. She was therefore in breach of her visa conditions and her conduct and actions were not found to have met the conditions required for “voluntary work”.
The court dismissed the claim for judicial review. It was held that the decision made to cancel the Claimant’s permission to stay was rational and lawful. It was also stated that the Claimant “worked outside the confines of her visa and that she had deliberately attempted to deceive the Immigration Officers”.
Conclusion
This decision should serve as a reminder for how strict the need for compliance is, and how imperative it is to seek guidance from experts who can provide legal advice and training regarding compliance with immigration law. There should be thoughtful consideration as to whether work is classified as ‘voluntary’ with reference to the above case going forward.
Skilled Worker applications and sponsor licences: How our Immigration Solicitors can help
Here at Carter Thomas, we are experienced in preparing Skilled Worker and sponsor licence applications to ensure a successful outcome. We provide expert guidance and assistance to businesses and individuals throughout the process. We can also create bespoke training regarding sponsor licence guidance, duties & compliance.
If you or your business requires legal assistance or if you would like to discuss your situation with one of our experts, please contact us or complete our enquiry form below.
For further updates and insights on immigration policy, you can subscribe to receive our legal updates here.
