Kenyan migrant avoids deportation from Britain as asylum claim dismissal 'riddled with typos'

13 May 2025, 19:57 | Updated: 13 May 2025, 20:02

A Kenyan migrant has been allowed to stay in the UK after a judge discovered that a document dismissing her asylum claim was “riddled” with typos.

The married asylum seeker, who has not been named, has won her legal battle and will not be forced to return home to the country she left in 2018

She was reportedly forced to flee when it emerged she had been having an affair with a woman she met in 2013 and feared she would be "killed" by her husband or the authorities if she returned to Kenya.

It came after mobile phone repair technicians found intimate photographs revealing the affair when backing up her device, sharing around the images, she alleged.

The Home Office rejected her initial claim and she appealed to the First Tier Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber.

Read more: Bearded asylum seeker declared ‘child’ by judges despite Home Office finding he is at least 23

Read more: LBC caller: 'Forget asylum seekers, look after our war veterans instead'

It was dismissed for a second time after a judge ruled that she would be able to find sufficient "protection" back in Kenya.

'Careless errors and misstatements'

However, the Upper Tier Tribunal has since found the judgement dismissing her claims was "riddled" with numerous "careless" errors and "misstatements" of evidence.

Upper Tribunal Judge David Pickup said: "The decision is so riddled with errors, both typographical and misstatements of the evidence, together with a misunderstanding of the purport of the objective evidence, that the objective reader of the decision cannot be at all satisfied that anxious scrutiny has been applied to the [asylum seeker's] case.

“I am driven to the conclusion that in these circumstances it would be unfair to permit the decision to stand and that collectively the errors amount to a material error of law.”

In one “significant” error, the judgment said the claimant was “entitled to humanitarian protection” instead of saying that she was “not” entitled to it.

'Anyone reading the document would be most unimpressed'

Judge Pickup said anyone who read the document would likely be “most unimpressed" and led to doubt that anxious "scrutiny had been applied to the case”.

The asylum seeker's lawyers argued the judge failed to give "adequate reasoning" to back up statements made in the decision.

They also argued the judge "misstated" the asylum seeker's claim.

Home Office lawyers argued the judge had “done enough” despite the “shortcomings” of the initial ruling.

Last week, a shock report revealded the cost of asylum accommodation is expected to be more than three times higher than previously estimated at £15.3 billion over 10 years.

Original estimates from the Home Office for asylum accommodation and support contracts totalled £4.5 billion over the 10-year period for 2019-2029, the report said.

But, in 2024/2025, the current expected total stands at £15.3 billion over the same period, it said.The National Audit Office (NAO) published a briefing into the Home Office’s contracts for housing asylum seekers on Wednesday to support an inquiry into the issue by the Commons’ Home Affairs Committee.

The watchdog said: “The Home Office’s total spend on asylum accommodation is more than planned and it has few levers to control costs.”

It added that the number of people seeking asylum housed in Home Office accommodation rose by 134% between December 2019 and 2024, from 47,000 to 110,000.

The watchdog said this was because of the increase in people arriving in the UK by crossing the English Channel and a rise in those claiming asylum who were previously detained under the Conservative government's Illegal Migration Act 2023.

It comes as the Labour scrambles to slash the UK's net migration, which has reached record highs in recent months.

Addressing the nation on Monday, Sir Keir Starmer said Britain risks “becoming an island of strangers” if net migration doesn’t fall.

Speaking to LBC’s James O'Brien, Sir Sadiq said he “understands” why Labour is seeking to crackdown on immigration but “wouldn’t have used” the same language as the PM.

When pressed on the PM’s comments, including his description of a recent period of high immigration as a “squalid chapter” in Britain's history, Sir Sadiq said: “Those aren’t the words I would use.”

He added: “But, If you listen to the Keir’s speech, he also spoke about the strength of diversity.”

“I think, what he’s referring too is the promise made by brexiteers, I think he’s referring to that (high numbers of immigration).

“What he’s not referring to, is the contribution we make to British society.”