Case Study: Successful Administrative Review of Tier 1 Entrepreneur Visa

Our Immigration Team were recently instructed to represent three clients who wanted to enter the UK as Tier 1 entrepreneurial team migrants. The third client was a dependant wife of one of the members of the team. The Applicants had initially submitted an application for entry under Tier 1 Entrepreneur route by themselves, which was refused and they were given a right to request Administrative Review of the decision.

Our Immigration Team were instructed to prepare and submit a request for reconsideration of the Home Office’s decision by way of administrative review as the decision maker had not considered all the evidence submitted by the applicants in the initial application.  The Applicants were team entrepreneurs who wanted to run a business in the UK and planned to invest £200,000 in their trading business. Our Immigration Team prepared and submitted the Administrative review request along with the requisite supporting documents and detailed representations. We have recently been informed by the Home Office that our administrative review request was successful.

Home Office’s Reasons for Refusal 

The Entry Clearance Officer (ECO) in his decision to refuse the application stated that despite the Applicants being awarded the required 75 points, he was not satisfied that the Applicants were genuine entrepreneurs and questioned the credibility of the Applicants as a team. However the original decision maker had failed to consider a number of facts and relied incorrectly on assumptions made during an interview conducted by the ECO. The ECO failed to do the following:

  • The ECO had failed to consider substantial and important documents submitted by the Applicants.
  • The ECO had also failed to take into account the Applicants’ previous business experience and knowledge within the prospective business and trading activity.
  • In its decision the Home Office stated that the Applicants lacked business experience completely ignoring the Applicants’ five years business experience in the same field as their proposed new business.
  • ECO had also misinterpreted the Applicants’ very detailed and accurate business plan and in error had assumed the figures stated in the business plan were incorrect.
  • The ECO also relied heavily on the interview conducted with the Applicants  and had failed to give the Applicants a written record of the interview and as such the Applicants were unable to refute any assertions made by the ECO in the refusal letter.
  • The Applicants further voiced their concerns that the manner in which that interview was conducted by the Entry Clearance Officer was questionable if not unreasonable.

Our Specialist Immigration Solicitors made strong representations to the Home Office highlighting the fact that the original decision maker had failed to consider all the evidence that was submitted as per paragraph AR2.11 (d) of Appendix AR of the Immigration Rules and had applied the Immigration Rules incorrectly.

Administrative Review: Overview

Administrative review (AR) is the term given by the Home Office to a process of internal review of certain eligible decisions, whereby an applicant can request that a decision with which they disagree is reviewed by a Home Office official separate from the original decision-maker, rather than by an independent tribunal or court.

Where an applicant has a right of AR, they have no statutory right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) in relation to the decision on their category-based application under the Immigration Rules.

Appendix AR defines Administrative Review as being a process to decide whether an ‘eligible decision’ is wrong due to a ‘case working error’ and states the kinds of decisions that are eligible for AR in the UK, overseas and at the border. Administrative review will only consider the following claimed case working errors, which are specified in AR2.11(a)-(d) and AR2.12 of Appendix AR of the Immigration Rules. The case working errors for decisions are where:

  • the original decision maker’s decision was incorrect (paragraph AR2.11(a)) in decisions to:
  • refuse an entry clearance application on the basis of paragraph 320(7A) or 320(7B) (false representations, false documents or information, failure to disclose material facts or previous breach of conditions)
  • refuse an in UK application on the basis of paragraph 322(1A) (refusal on the basis of false representations, documents or information or failure to disclose material facts) of the Rules
  • cancel leave to enter or remain which is in force as a visitor under paragraphs V9.2 or V9.4 of appendix V of the immigration rules
  • cancel leave to enter or remain which is in force at the border under paragraph 321A(2) (change of circumstances, false representations or failure to disclose material facts)
  • the original decision maker’s decision to refuse an application on the basis that the date of application was beyond any time limit in these Rules was incorrect (paragraph AR2.11(b))
  • the original decision maker otherwise applied the Immigration Rules incorrectly (paragraph AR2.11(c))
  • the original decision maker failed to apply the Secretary of State’s relevant published policy and guidance in relation to the application (paragraph AR2.11(d))
  • there has been an error in calculating the correct period or conditions of immigration leave either held or to be granted (paragraph AR2.12)

According to the guidance published by the Home Office Administrative reviews will be carried out by a separate team that is independent from the team who made the original decision to ensure transparency and independence in the review process.

Appendix AR  and the guidance further explain the possible the outcome of the Administrative Review in terms of success (in which case the eligible decision will be withdrawn) or failure (in which case the eligible decision may remain in force for all the reasons previously given, or with some of the reasons withdrawn, or for different or additional reasons).

Successful Tier 1 Entrepreneur Visa Applications, Administrative Review & Appeals

Our team of experienced and professionally qualified solicitors and barristers will be able to guide you through the process of making a Tier 1 Entrepreneur visa application step by step and limit the possibility of failure by complying with the strict letter of the law.

We also undertake a great deal of appeal work before the Immigration and Asylum Tribunal and have a successful track record of successful results for our clients. We have the experience and the knowledge required to take your case forward successfully. If you have had a entrepreneur visa refused, contact us to discuss your case so that we can provide you with a case assessment.


Call Now Button search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close