News

An innocent man wrongfully exiled from the UK after a case of mistaken identity left him accused of crimes he did not commit has been reunited with his family thanks to Duncan Lewis’ public law team.

The Duncan Lewis client (A) was removed from a plane and told he was subject to a deportation order due to an extensive criminal record—an allegation that was completely false – after taking a short holiday.

Despite clear evidence of its error and that A had no criminal record, the Home Office doubled down on its error, and claimed that A was actually deportee using a false identity. 

Duncan Lewis Solicitors has now successfully challenged the Home Office’s wrongful exclusion of an innocent man, securing his return to the UK after nearly seven months of unlawful exile.

James Packer, Director of Public Law at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, said:
 

"We are delighted that our client’s Kafkaesque nightmare is finally over. He was wrongly exiled from the UK for nearly seven months due to an entirely avoidable Home Office error.

“The Windrush scandal highlighted the devastating effect that poor record keeping at the Home Office had on innocent people’s lives [footnote]. It is deeply troubling that the Home Office has once again chosen expediency over justice, and again implemented a flawed system in the face of warnings that it would lead to exactly this type of issue arising. Our client’s many clearly and calmly expressed explanations were simply brushed aside. Unfortunately this case highlights that people fighting for their basic rights often need experienced professional representation."

Our client, referred to as A, had been waiting for a decision on his EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) application when he left the UK for a short holiday. On his return, he was denied re-entry.

Over the past four years, the Claimant ("A") persistently contacted the Home Office regarding his pending EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) application. The Home Office cited delays due to concerns about criminal charges against A, which required further investigation. After A provided proof of a clean criminal record, he believed the matter was resolved or nearing resolution. Subsequently, A departed the UK for a short holiday while his EUSS application remained pending. Upon attempting to re-enter, he was removed from the plane and informed of his exclusion from the UK, based on the enforcement of a deportation order linked to an extensive criminal record.

A immediately contested this action, asserting he had neither a criminal record nor adverse immigration history. In subsequent correspondence, the Home Office acknowledged that his file had likely been confused with that of another individual sharing a similar name, date of birth, and nationality. They advised A to await the separation of the two files. However, A later received a letter stating that the Home Office had concluded there was no error, asserting he was the deportee using a different identity, partly based on a photograph in the deportee's file. At this juncture, A sought assistance from the Duncan Lewis Public Law team.

We prepared a judicial review claim. The limited information from the Home Office about the deportee made it challenging to demonstrate that A was a different individual. This task was further complicated by the deportee's history of using false identities.

Despite these challenges, Sarah and Annie, under the guidance of James Packer, compiled extensive evidence spanning A's lifetime, which was submitted to the Upper Tribunal. Upper Tribunal Judge Perkins described this as "an array of documentary evidence" presenting "a compelling prima facie case" that A was not the same individual as the deportee.

Following the expiration of the shortened response period to our claim, the Home Office conceded that our client was not the individual excluded from the UK, allowing him to reunite with his family. The Home Office now acknowledges an error led to the conflation of the two files. While the cause of this error is under investigation, it is likely linked to the implementation of a new database, despite warnings about potential inaccuracies.

A newspaper article published by The Guardian on 14 March 2024 revealed that:

• Major flaws in a huge Home Office immigration database have resulted in more than 76,000 people being listed with incorrect names, photographs or immigration status.
• Leaked internal documents reveal the scale of the database fiasco at the Home Office … The problem, which involves “merged identities”, where two or more people have biographical and biometric details linked incorrectly, is leaving people unable to prove their rights to work, rent housing or access free NHS treatment.
• Government sources confirmed that an investigation was under way by the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is considering whether the failure represents data breaches.

The Home Office's immigration database has experienced significant errors, affecting over 76,000 individuals.

These inaccuracies have led to wrongful exclusions from the UK, as seen in the case of our client, "A," who was mistakenly associated with another individual's criminal record.

In January 2024, the Home Office implemented changes to improve data accuracy. However, this led to "merged identities," where individuals' records were incorrectly linked. A leaked document highlighted that while the changes aimed to enhance accuracy for millions, they adversely affected thousands due to pre-existing errors.

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has launched an investigation into these IT incidents, focusing on the Person Centric Data Platform and Atlas systems.

Despite these errors, there appears to be no clear plan to resolve the issues for the affected individuals.

Our client, "A," is now pursuing substantial damages due to the distress and inconvenience caused by this mismanagement. At Duncan Lewis, our Public Law team is prepared to assist others facing similar issues arising from Home Office data errors.

We were assisted in the judicial review by Greg O Ceallaigh KC and Alex Schymyck of Garden Court Chambers.

Our Team

About James Packer

James Packer is a Director in the Public Law department at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, specialising in judicial review, immigration, civil liberties, and costs litigation. Recognised by Chambers & Partners and The Legal 500 for his expertise, he regularly conducts test cases at the highest levels, including the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court, and European Court of Human Rights. His work spans unlawful detention, enforced removals, access to legal aid, and complex costs disputes. James has written numerous articles for Free Movement, wrote the chapter on costs in Criminal Judicial Review (ed Von Berg), and was assistant editor for the Free Movement Guide Costs in Immigration Cases.

About Sarah Mills

Sarah Mills is a Public Law solicitor within James Packer’s Public Law Team at Duncan Lewis Solicitors. Her specialism is in human rights and public law; with a particular expertise in trafficking and asylum matters alongside a wife ranging practice in judicial review claimant challenges – particularly those related to immigration and civil liberties.

About Annie Taylor

Annie Taylor is a caseworker working under the supervision of Director James Packer. Annie has her own immigration cases and works with James on public law issues in immigration and other contexts such as challenges to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, and local council decisions in relation to housing and development.

Duncan Lewis Solicitors

Duncan Lewis Solicitors is an award-winning Times Top 250 law firm, which is ranked as Top Tier by both the Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 directories. The company represents clients in more than 25 practice areas across 13 key offices nationwide. This year the company was crowned Law Firm of the Year at the Lexis Nexis awards 2024 and has been noted for its commitment to diversity and inclusion.