Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer's London Disputes team, acting on a pro bono basis, has successfully represented its client, the Asylum Support Appeals Project (ASAP), as an intervenor in significant appellate proceedings concerning the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal (Asylum Support) in cases where the Home Office treats asylum claims as implicitly withdrawn.
Following ASAP's intervention, the Supreme Court has refused the Secretary of State permission to appeal an earlier Court of Appeal judgment, confirming that withdrawal-based asylum support decisions remain subject to meaningful review within the statutory appeal system.
ASAP had intervened to assist the Court with submissions on the importance of the First-tier Tribunal (Asylum Support) as a specialist, accessible, and timely forum for resolving asylum support disputes, including those concerning section 95 support under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, which provides accommodation and financial assistance to asylum seekers.
The issue has significant practical consequences. The Home Office considers asylum claims as implicitly withdrawn following an individual's apparent failure to respond to correspondence or attend a required interview, often because notifications were sent to incorrect addresses or were not copied to their legal representatives. Where the Home Office treats a claim as withdrawn, it may conclude that the individual is no longer an "asylum seeker" for the purposes of the Act and may therefore refuse or terminate that support, leaving individuals at immediate risk of destitution.
The Secretary of State for the Home Department argued that the First-tier Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to scrutinise whether a withdrawal decision had been lawfully made and that any challenge to such a decision could only be pursued by way of judicial review. ASAP's evidence and submissions addressed the significant barriers that vulnerable individuals would face if required to pursue judicial review rather than the specialist statutory appeal route.
On 18 December 2025, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Secretary of State's appeal in R (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v First-tier Tribunal (MAH & Ors) [2025] EWCA Civ 1654, confirming that the First-tier Tribunal is entitled to examine whether a withdrawal decision complied with the relevant legal framework and Home Office policy when determining entitlement to support. The Secretary of State subsequently sought permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, which ASAP, represented by HSF Kramer, opposed.
In an Order dated 1 May 2026, the Supreme Court refused permission to appeal, leaving the Court of Appeal's judgment undisturbed and confirming that withdrawal-based asylum support decisions remain subject to meaningful review within the statutory appeal system.
The HSF Kramer team comprised Partner Nusrat Zar, Consultant Andrew Lidbetter, Pro Bono Counsel Lara Nassif, Senior Associates Hannah Lau and James Barrett, and Associate Ha lim Bashir.
HSF Kramer has a longstanding commitment to providing pro bono legal services to charities, NGOs, governments of developing nations, and marginalised individuals.