The Court of Appeal handed down judgment on 22 June 2026 in two Graduate route appeals concerning refusals where the student sponsor had not notified the Home Office of course completion by the application date.
Judgment: Dilpreet Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWCA Civ 766, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 22 June 2026. The appeal was heard on 21 April 2026 together with the appeal of Falguniben Varun Barai and Varun Alpeshkumar Barai (case numbers CA-2024-002426 and CA-2025-000116). Lord Justice Stuart-Smith gave the judgment. Lord Justice Coulson and Lord Justice Baker also sat.
Each appellant wishes to bring judicial review proceedings against a refusal of leave to remain under Appendix Graduate. In each case the refusal was upheld on administrative review, and the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) refused permission to bring proceedings. The Court of Appeal then granted permission to appeal.
The appeals concern the Successful Completion Requirement. Paragraph GR 4.2 requires the applicant to have successfully completed the course undertaken during their last grant of permission on the Student route. Paragraph GR 4.3 requires the student sponsor to have notified the Home Office, by the date of application, that the applicant has completed that course.
Mr Singh applied on 14 December 2023. His sponsor had not notified the Home Office of completion by then. The application was refused on 1 February 2024 under GR 4.2 and GR 4.3, and administrative review was unsuccessful on 5 April 2024.
Mrs Barai varied an in-time fee waiver application into a Graduate application on 22 April 2024, with Mr Barai applying as her dependant. Her sponsor's board approved completion of her course on 23 April 2024. The application was refused on 30 May 2024 under GR 4.3.
Mr Singh pursues four grounds: procedural fairness, the construction of GR 4.2, consistency with Home Office guidance, and the handling of evidence at administrative review. The Barai appeal proceeds on one ground, described by Zacaroli LJ as an arguable tension between GR 4.3 and the guidance. The guidance says that where no notification has been received from the sponsor, but the Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) shows the applicant had been studying a qualifying qualification, the caseworker must not refuse the application if it would otherwise be granted. Instead, the caseworker must contact the sponsor to ask for confirmation of successful completion.
On procedural fairness, the court said it is "an inherent feature of the points-based system that it puts a premium on predictability and certainty at the expense of discretion" (paragraph 32). It noted that GR 4.3 relies on action by the sponsor and requires nothing of the applicant (paragraph 33).
The court also said that the online Graduate application does not list evidence of successful completion among the documents an applicant must provide (paragraph 24). It said that not supplying such evidence is not an "error or omission" under the Graduate route guidance or the Evidential Flexibility guidance (paragraph 25).