- Administrative Review was designed to decide cases in 28 days but averaged 362 days per case in 2024, with EU Settlement Scheme reviews at 523 days.
- The Immigration Act 2014 cut the number of decisions carrying a right of appeal from 17 to three, moving Skilled Worker, Student and Graduate refusals to internal review only.
- The reform delivered an estimated £182 million net saving over 10 years, with £217 million going to MoJ and HMCTS and a £35 million gap left at the Home Office.
The Home Office has published its first full evaluation of the appeal rights it stripped out of the immigration system a decade ago, and the central number is stark: the internal review built to replace those appeals took an average of 362 days per case in 2024, against a design target of 28 days.
The report, Review of appeals process changes in the Immigration Act 2014, was published on 31 July 2026. It fulfils a recommendation the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (ICIBI) made in 2019, when inspectors found the department could not evidence whether the reform had worked.
Free toolUSCIS Receipt Number DecoderFor anyone refused a visa, an extension, or settlement today, the meaning is blunt. Most refusals no longer carry a right to put your case to an independent judge. What you get instead is Administrative Review, an £80 internal reconsideration by another Home Office caseworker, and guidance tells applicants it can take 12 months or more.
The review’s conclusion is hedged. Administrative Review still “presents as an adequate remedy compared to pre-2014 processes,” it says, while conceding that “its sustainability under current conditions remains a concern.”
What the review actually measured
The Home Office limited itself to two questions it had data for: whether Administrative Review improved access to justice, and whether it delivered value for money. Both were tested from 2014 to 2024 using internal case-working data, Ministry of Justice tribunal statistics, and the 2013 Impact Assessment.
The ICIBI had asked for something wider, including evidence on decision quality. The department dropped it, citing “limitations in available data, particularly around perceptions, behavioural trends and decision quality,” and concedes the analysis “does not consider qualitative evidence that would help evaluate the effectiveness and perceived fairness of Administrative Review.” So this is a speed-and-cost exercise, not a fairness audit.
From 17 appeal rights to three
The Immigration Act 2014 rewrote section 82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. The government’s own framing was that it cut the number of decisions attracting a right of appeal from 17 to three: refusal of a protection (asylum) claim, refusal of a human rights claim, and revocation of protection status. A fourth route was created separately from 2020 for EU Settlement Scheme decisions.
Everything else moved to Administrative Review: Skilled Worker, Graduate, Global Talent, Innovator Founder, Youth Mobility, UK Ancestry and Hong Kong British National (Overseas) refusals, among others. So do refusals on the student route, where compliance enforcement has tightened sharply.
The difference is not cosmetic. An appeal is heard by an independent judge who weighs evidence afresh. An Administrative Review is a Home Office caseworker checking for case-working error, with new evidence admissible only in narrow circumstances set out in the Immigration Rules. The report confirms there is “no intention to change from the stance of the original policy intention” on fresh evidence or credibility assessments.
The promise against the outcome
The 2013 Impact Assessment projected that the reform would cut roughly 39,500 appeals a year and deliver a net benefit of £219 million over ten years, with an £80 fee making the new system cost-neutral for the Home Office. Here is how each assumption held up.
Why the delays took hold
The 28-day target was largely met between 2014 and 2019. The collapse came afterwards, when three pressures compounded. EU Settlement Scheme cases entered Administrative Review from November 2018, and those reviews forced caseworkers to gather and assess new evidence such as proof of residence, which the report says made them “more akin to tribunal processes.” Eligibility ended in October 2023, but the expanded remit had already dragged out every other category.
Demand then spiked. Monthly intake fell to 142 in June 2020 under travel restrictions, then surged to a record 4,842 in March 2021 as pent-up applications, the Afghanistan and Ukraine crises, and new post-Brexit routes hit at once.
Staffing lagged. The Administrative Review Unit went from 36 full-time decision-makers in October 2021 to 67 by October 2024, and output peaked at 3,454 completed cases in June 2024. Intake in 2023 still stayed near double pre-pandemic levels, a pattern familiar to anyone tracking the department’s push to automate case handling.
A saving for the courts, a hole in the Home Office budget
On money, the review lands on a net positive. An Administrative Review costs the Home Office £225.90 net per case; a First-tier Tribunal appeal costs an estimated £1,396.33, derived from a 2024/25 sitting-day cost of £4,249 spread across roughly three cases a day. That gap of about £1,170 per case, across a decade of substituted appeals, produces an estimated £182 million net saving to taxpayers.
The distribution is uneven. The Ministry of Justice and HMCTS captured an estimated £217 million; the Home Office absorbed a £35 million shortfall. The £80 fee has not moved since 2014 while the unit cost rose to £246, and because fees are refunded or waived in many cases, the department collects an average of £20.10 per review, roughly one application in four paid in full.
What happened inside the tribunals
Nearly 120,000 appeals a year were lodged with the First-tier Tribunal between 2010/11 and 2013/14. By 2017/18, volumes had fallen around 50% against 2014/15. Disposals dropped from 100,122 in 2013/14 to 39,387 in 2023/24, and disposals per sitting day fell from 4.9 in 2012/13 to 2.6 in 2023/24.
The Home Office reads that as simpler disputes being filtered out, leaving judges with harder cases, though it calls the reading “tentative.” Appeal receipts are climbing again, partly because EUSS cases now go straight to appeal and partly, the report suggests, because restricting appeal rights “may have encouraged individuals to frame their claims under human rights grounds.” That is where the fiercest litigation sits, including the Home Office being blocked from challenging a halt to an Eritrean deportation.
The deport first, appeal later power
The 2014 Act also inserted section 94B into the 2002 Act, letting the Home Secretary certify a human rights claim so any appeal had to be brought from outside the UK. Between 28 July 2014 and 31 December 2016 the department issued 1,175 certificates. Only 72 people appealed from abroad, and none succeeded.
The Supreme Court ended that in R (Kiarie and Byndloss) [2017] UKSC 42, holding that out-of-country appeals were not an effective remedy and breached the procedural requirements of Article 8. The 2026 review does not revisit the ruling, but the power remains on the statute book and the removal-first instinct persists, as seen in detention operations run ahead of removal flights.
What a refused applicant can do today
Your refusal letter tells you which remedy you have. You do not get to choose, and the deadlines are short.
Three practical points follow. Front-load your evidence, because Administrative Review will not accept new documents except in narrow circumstances. Keep a record of the delay, since guidance concedes 12 months or more and promises an update at six months. And check whether judicial review is your only route, which it is for most visitor refusals and for decisions left standing after a failed Administrative Review.
What the Home Office says happens next
The department names one priority: cutting turnaround times. It lists front-end changes to manage caseload, better system access to finalise international decisions, and formal management information, backed by more resource. A further ICIBI inspection took place in 2025, and the Home Office says its response will set out the detail.
What the review does not do is reopen the appeal rights themselves. That fight has moved to the Immigration and Asylum Bill introduced on 30 June 2026, which would abolish the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) and replace it with an Independent Immigration Appeals Authority, with hearings from late 2027 and cases decided by trained adjudicators, not immigration judges.
The Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association said on 1 July 2026 that “dismantling immigration tribunals in favour of an executive-controlled body would weaken the separation of powers,” and that “the appeals process is not the cause of delays and backlogs,” pointing instead at poor initial decisions and legal aid gaps. The Law Society has urged ministers to drop the plan. Set against more than 150,000 outstanding appeals and the proposed 10-year wait for indefinite leave to remain, the 2026 review reads less like a verdict on 2014 than the evidence base for the next round of cuts.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long does a UK administrative review take in 2026?
The Home Office review published on 31 July 2026 recorded an average of 362 days per case in 2024, and EU Settlement Scheme reviews averaged 523 days. Current Home Office guidance tells applicants a decision can take 12 months or more, with a promised update if nothing has been decided within six months.
How many rights of appeal did the Immigration Act 2014 remove?
The government’s own framing was that the Act cut the number of immigration decisions carrying a right of appeal from 17 to three: refusal of a protection claim, refusal of a human rights claim, and revocation of protection status. A separate appeal right for EU Settlement Scheme decisions was created from 2020.
What is the deadline to request an administrative review after a UK visa refusal?
You have 14 days from the decision if you are in the UK and 28 days if you are outside the UK. If you are held in immigration detention after a border refusal, the deadline drops to 7 days. Late requests are usually rejected, so the date on your refusal letter is the date that matters.
How much does an administrative review cost and is the fee refunded?
The fee is £80 and has not changed since 2014. It is refunded if the original decision is overturned in your favour or if the application is rejected. The Home Office says the actual cost of processing a case reached £246 in 2024/25, while the average fee it collects is £20.10.
Can I submit new evidence in an administrative review?
Only in narrowly defined circumstances set out in the Immigration Rules, such as showing that a document already submitted is genuine, or where deception was found or evidential flexibility was not applied. The 2026 review states there is no intention to change that policy, so evidence must be complete at the initial application stage.
When do I need judicial review instead of an appeal or administrative review?
Judicial review is the route when no appeal right and no administrative review right exists, including most visitor visa refusals and decisions that stand after an unsuccessful administrative review. Claims must be filed promptly and in any event within three months, usually in the Upper Tribunal.
Did the Immigration Act 2014 appeal changes save money?
The Home Office estimates a net saving to taxpayers of £182 million across 2014 to 2024. The Ministry of Justice and HMCTS captured about £217 million of that, while the Home Office absorbed a £35 million funding gap because the £80 fee no longer covers the £246 unit cost.
What is replacing the First-tier Tribunal for immigration appeals?
The Immigration and Asylum Bill introduced on 30 June 2026 would abolish the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) and replace it with an Independent Immigration Appeals Authority, with hearings from late 2027 and cases decided by trained adjudicators. ILPA and the Law Society have both opposed the plan.
