R (on the application of Prestige Social Care Services Ltd) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)

Case summary
Linked cases
Permission to Appeal
Previous proceedings

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2026/0146

Parties

Appellant(s)

Prestige Social Care Services Limited

Respondent(s)

Secretary of State for Home Department

Issue

Must a court nevertheless refuse relief under section 31(2A) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 where there has been a finding of procedural unfairness because it is highly likely that the outcome would not have been substantially different without the unfairness?

Facts

Prestige, a social care provider, held a sponsor licence. The Home Office suspended its licence in March 2024 due to concerns about high staff turnover and recruitment irregularities. Particular concerns included Ms K, who was recruited for a role requiring driving despite having disclosed that she could not drive, and Mr F, who failed the required English language test. The Home Office also considered Prestige’s sponsored-worker turnover substantially above the sector average. Despite Prestige providing evidence defending its recruitment practices, the Secretary of State revoked its licence in October 2024, relying on non-genuine vacancies and wider deficiencies in its recruitment processes. Prestige brought a claim for judicial review. The Administrative Court dismissed the judicial review, finding that there was an error of law but refusing a remedy under s.31(2A) Senior Courts Act 1981 on the basis that the outcome would not have been substantially different without the error. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.