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

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0073

Parties

Appellant(s)

Dhasarathan Seerangan

Respondent(s)

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Issue

Should the Appellant have been treated as an overstayer at the time he applied for leave to remain as a skilled worker?

Facts

The Appellant is an Indian national. He came to the UK in 2020 on a student visa expiring on 30 January 2022. He did not leave at the expiry of his visa and accordingly became an overstayer. On 14 November 2022, he requested from UK Visas and Immigration (“UKVI”) an “exceptional assurance”, relying on the Home Office’s Coronavirus Exceptional Assurance policy (“the EA Policy”) (the broad purpose of which was to afford a level of protection to non-UK nationals who were unable to leave the UK when their visas expired as a result of travel restrictions due to the Covid-19 pandemic). By a letter from UKVI dated 16 November 2022, the Appellant was told that he did not qualify under the EA Policy but would be given a “short-term assurance” expiring on 30 November 2022. On 29 November 2022, the Appellant applied to the Home Office for leave to remain as a skilled worker. This was refused. The reason for refusal was that the Appellant was, at the time of his application, an overstayer. The Appellant argues that the effect of the EA Policy and/or the assurance given in the UKVI letter of 16 November 2022 is that he should not have been treated as an overstayer at the time he made his skilled worker application. The Appellant brought proceedings for judicial review of the refusal decision against the Respondent, the Secretary of State for the Home Department. The Upper Tribunal dismissed his claim, and the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal. The Appellant now appeals to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

28 April 2025

Case origin

PTA

Back to top