Home Office sued after stripping almost 1,500 EU citizens of right to live in UK

The Home Office is being sued for alleged breach of the Brexit withdrawal agreement after stripping almost 1,500 EU citizens of their full rights to live in the UK.

The campaign group the3million filed papers at the High Court on Friday amid multiple cases where EU citizens who had been granted pre‑settled status were recently announced as having received “errors” in that decision.

According to the statement of claim, the Home Office’s decision to remove certain rights from pre‑settled citizens was made without the procedural safeguards mandated by the Brexit withdrawal agreement (WA).

Such safeguards include the possibility of appeal and a proportionality assessment, designed to determine whether the removal of those rights was justified by the fact that these individuals had established their lives in the United Kingdom based on the initial Home Office determination.

One affected individual is a 33‑year‑old engineer of Brazilian‑Italian heritage who has resided in London since 2018. Initially, he was informed that while he could remain in the UK, his Brazilian wife was not eligible, a determination that was reversed after objections were raised.

Another citizen, a woman working by the NHS and pursuing a PhD in dentistry, stated that the Home Office’s notification had dramatically altered her life.

In October 2026, the Home Office acknowledged that when applicants presented evidence of Italian citizenship obtained through jure sanguinis, they would now treat the individual as an Italian from birth.

Previously, the Home Office denied status to several Brazilian Italians under the pretext of an “error” because they lacked an Italian passport at the time of application, without formally verifying their birthplace.

Monique Hawkins, acting CEO of the3million, said: “The Home Office is putting the cart before the horse. It denies people the safeguards the withdrawal agreement guarantees – a fair assessment and a right of appeal – because it says they are ‘clearly’ not covered by the agreement. That’s like saying someone doesn’t need a trial because they’re ‘clearly’ guilty.”

Hawkins noted that the Home Office’s reversal regarding jure sanguinis Italian nationals indicated a willingness to alter its policy once initial errors became apparent.

“This is a matter of ensuring proper due process,” Hawkins added. “Despite advocacy efforts since early 2025, the Home Office had not changed course, leaving the campaign group with no alternative but to pursue legal action.”

the campaign group is seeking a court ruling that the “grant in error policy” is unlawful under the Brexit withdrawal agreement (WA) and possible common law, and to order the removal of any contested provisions from the published policy.

Many expressed frustration that, as jure sanguinis (direct and unbroken Italian relatives), they could not obtain a passport due to public institutions being closed during the coronavirus pandemic.

Lawyers have contended that the UK’s apparent generosity in lowering evidentiary requirements for EU citizens seeking to remain after Brexit compounded the current policy of rights removal.

The unlawfulness of the policy is further exacerbated by the nature of the EU settlement scheme itself. The UK deliberately implemented a scheme that, in numerous respects, offered greater generosity than the minimum standards required by the WA.

Hawkins added that grants were often facilitated by evidential flexibility and, in some instances, discretionary decision‑making.

“As a result, many status holders remain unaware of the basis for their status—whether it stemmed from compliance with the substantive WA requirements, Appendix EU domestic law, discretionary caseworker decisions, or an actual error in the grant.”

Investigate the cases revealed involve Brazilians who have Italian ancestors; under Italian law these individuals are Italian by birth, yet the Home Office claimed they were not because they lacked an Italian passport at the time of application.

This is not the first instance of litigation against the Home Office’s implementation of the withdrawal agreement.

In 2022, the statute‑backed watchdog brought the matter to court to verify the Home Office’s compliance with the withdrawal agreement.

The Independent Monitoring Authority, backed by the3million, accused the Home Office of putting EU citizens at risk of losing rights to work or rent a home by forcing them to reapply for settled status once their pre‑settled status expired.

The High Court upheld the IMA’s decision, finding the Home Office’s conditions unlawful.

A Home Office spokesperson said proceedings were ongoing and they would not comment.

Source link