ICYMI: We published Mark Smith's analysis of G v G [2021] UKSC 9, where the Supreme Court addressed the clash between the Refugee Convention and the Hague Convention on Child Abduction. With significant developments since, how applicable is it now?

Trafficking referrals to the NRM hit their highest level since records began in the year to June 2026, and the conclusive grounds backlog has grown for the first time since 2022, even as the government focuses on 'misuse'. Jasmine Quiller-Doust takes us through the figures.

7. The Bill would also remove the requirement to grant temporary permission to help recognised victims recover; ATLEU says 96% of VTS leave grants are for recovery. We consider new obstacles risk more refusals, longer waits and lost backlog progress.

6. There were 1,597 reconsideration requests, with 81% positive at the reasonable grounds stage and 83% at the conclusive grounds stage. The Bill's new credibility test would let factors such as delay in making a claim damage a person's credibility.

5. At the end of June, 5,656 cases awaited a conclusive grounds decision, up 23% since March, rising to 5,948 by 31 August. The median wait rose from 50 to 84 days. The Home Office aims to clear the backlog by December 2026.

4. The Immigration and Asylum Bill would make disqualification mandatory and widen the definition of bad faith. Yet since January 2023, just 19 people have been disqualified on that ground, roughly one in every 3,800 referrals.

3. Of 23,573 reasonable grounds decisions, 64% were positive: 73% for the Single Competent Authority but just 34% for the Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority. At the conclusive grounds stage, the rates were 72% and 49% respectively.

2. Jasmine Quiller-Doust examines the figures. There were 6,954 referrals from April to June alone, a single-quarter record. The most common nationalities were UK (22%), Eritrean (13%) and Somali (11%); 74% of UK nationals referred were children.

Long thread alert 🧵 1. Referrals to the National Referral Mechanism reached 25,373 in the year to June 2026, the highest annual total on record, while the backlog of cases awaiting a conclusive grounds decision rose for the first time since 2022.

New: Trafficking referrals increase while government targets ‘misuse’ — by Jasmine Quiller-Doust

ICYMI: We published Heather Rolfe's analysis of new British Future research showing 46% would vote to rejoin the EU, and how support for free movement grows where it brings trade benefits and opportunities for UK citizens. Essential reading on shifting attitudes.

From 19 October 2026, the Administrative Court will decide whether a judicial review needs urgent consideration by looking at Form N463 alone. Nothing elsewhere in the bundle will count. Our advice: set out the full urgency case on the form itself. Aya Jamal explains.

Legal aid immigration lawyers: a deportation team is recruiting a Solicitor/Senior Caseworker to lead its women's prison project. £40,000+ depending on experience, full-time, permanent, flexible working available. Full details on our jobs board.

5. The full papers remain essential. Urgent applications must still include the documents required by paragraph 17.4 of the Judicial Review Guide, and applications in the wrong form or without them will not be passed to the urgent judge.

4. The Practice Statement cites DVP v SSHD [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin), where the Divisional Court criticised a single N463 for six Penally Camp claims that referred the judge to a separate interim relief application for its reasons.

3. The requirement to explain urgency on the face of the N463 is not new. What changes is enforcement: if the form alone does not justify urgency, urgent consideration will be refused, whatever the grounds or witness statements say.

2. The change comes from a Practice Statement issued by Mr Justice Chamberlain on 30 September 2026, following a significant rise in urgent applications. Aya Jamal takes us through what it means for immigration judicial reviews.

🧵 1. From 19 October 2026, the Administrative Court will decide whether a judicial review application needs urgent consideration by looking at Form N463 alone. Information elsewhere in the papers will not be taken into account.

New: Administrative Court tightens approach to urgent judicial review applications — by Aya Jamal

New: Job ad: Solicitor/Senior Caseworker Legal Aid Immigration – Women’s Prison Project Lead