Immigration | UK Bar

Doughty Street Chambers is a strong immigration set with significant expertise in judicial review proceedings challenging Home Office policy and decisions. The barristers are particularly well versed in asylum and deportation in the context of human rights law. An interviewee notes: "Doughty Street is well known for its excellent and cutting-edge immigration work." The barristers are said to be "highly experienced and able to advise on all aspects of immigration and nationality law." Members act for a large number of public access clients, as well as NGOs and private clients. Recent work highlights include leading the litigation efforts to prevent the Home Office from evicting failed asylum seekers during the pandemic, as well as presenting a challenge to the government's scheme of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda for their claims to be processed.

Garden Court Chambers is a highly esteemed immigration set with a strong track record in sophisticated cases at the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and SIAC. Areas of particular strength include complex asylum and deportation matters in the context of European human rights law, but also private, business and high net worth immigration. A source remarks: "Garden Court Chambers has everything you could want, with quality and experience across the board." Barristers from the set act for a broad range of clients on the claimant side including private individuals, children, families and sponsoring businesses. Recent highlights include Sonali Naik KC's leadership in the Court of Appeal case of AS v SSHD.

39 Essex Chambers is an impressive immigration and public law set with significant experience acting for both the government and claimants. Members are frequently instructed in sensitive and high-profile litigation before the higher courts, including the SIAC. Areas of complementary expertise include asylum, EU law, civil liberties and nationality law. Barristers from the set have acted in prominent recent cases, including Jack Anderson's involvement as part of the counsel team representing the Home Secretary in a case in the Divisional Court, concerning challenges to the policy of seeking to remove some asylum seekers to Rwanda for the determination of their claims.

Landmark Chambers offers deep expertise across a range of immigration matters, with a particularly strong bench at silk level. Areas of focus include deportation and unlawful detention matters, and immigration work involving EU law or the Withdrawal Agreement. The barristers appear in all the higher domestic courts and act both for claimants and the Home Secretary. Landmark Chambers is noted for its "comprehensive approach," and its barristers are regarded by instructing solicitors as "established specialists when it comes to complex matters concerning public law or immigration litigation." A notable recent highlight is the involvement of David Blundell KC, on behalf of the Home Secretary, in a challenge to consider the legality of the continued application of the good character requirement in connection with the Windrush scheme.

Matrix Chambers is a leading set with significant experience in immigration matters at all levels, from sensitive and high-profile national security SIAC proceedings to Supreme Court appeals on the Home Office's approach to victims of trafficking. Other areas of strength include unlawful detention claims and removals. The majority of the barristers' work in this area is for claimants. Recently, Raza Husain KC notably led representation of the claimants in AAA v SSHD, a judicial review claim concerning the Home Secretary's plan to remove failed asylum seekers to Rwanda. Interviewees note the set's ability to handle sophisticated matters, as well as the qualities of its particular barristers.

One Pump Court is routinely called upon in a wide range of immigration matters, including deportation, asylum and nationality law, encompassing both human rights and public law challenges. The set has a strong focus on publicly funded claimant-side work, and members act for a diverse client roster including claimants with mental or physical health conditions, and victims of trafficking. Recent work highlights include representing the appellant in AEB v SSHD, where the basis of the appeal concerned the right to a fair hearing. An interviewee says the set is "committed to providing the best possible representation to extremely vulnerable migrants and willing to take on legal aid cases where funds are usually extremely restricted." Its barristers are described as "excellent, incredibly efficient and hard-working."

Blackstone Chambers is a revered public law and human rights set with significant experience acting on behalf of claimants and the Home Secretary in complex immigration matters. Areas of strength include complex asylum claims, unlawful detention and issues involving EU law. Its recent notable work includes a challenge to the UK Government's refugee pushback policy, as well as appearing in the Supreme Court in Shamima Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission.

Barristers at 1 Crown Office Row are notable for their appearances in immigration and asylum cases before the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, and in SIAC hearings. They have acted in prominent cases including AAA and Others v Home Secretary - the Rwanda removals policy challenge - and Begum v Home Secretary. Members are deeply experienced in appeals involving an element of alleged criminality or national security concern.

Goldsmith Chambers offers a wealth of expertise in all areas of immigration and asylum, at all levels of the court and tribunal system, including the Supreme Court. Sources note its ability to handle complex matters and one interviewee says: "Goldsmith Chambers offers a very healthy range of expertise as a set, providing the opportunity to have a joint approach to highly complex cases, where multiple subject areas intersect and where multiple variables are at play." Notable recent highlights in the set's work include various judicial reviews, as well as EU Settlement Scheme appeals.

No5 Barristers' Chambers members regularly act in immigration and asylum matters at all levels of the court and tribunal system, and some have appeared before the ECJ and the ECtHR. They have a strong record of success in difficult challenges to deportation orders and asylum refusals, and possess significant expertise in relation to high-risk destinations for returnees. Key instructions this year include an appeal in the Supreme Court concerning deportation in an instance where the appellant had committed a crime but sought to resist deportation on the basis of undue harshness towards family members.