Family visa rules change to face High Court legal challenge

The minimum income for family visas rose by more than £10,000 to £29,000 from April.

Changes to family visa rules are facing a legal challenge (Alamy/PA)

A legal challenge is being brought against the Government for hiking the minimum income for family visas by thousands of pounds.

A lawyer for Reunite Families UK (RFUK) said the decision, announced last December, had been taken in “a cavalier manner” by Home Secretary James Cleverly.

The organisation said it had filed a legal challenge, and the lawyer said they would ask the High Court to quash the decision on the basis that Mr Cleverly had acted unlawfully.

The increases came as a complete surprise to the community we represent - and at a time when people all over the UK have been struggling with a relentless cost of living crisis.

Caroline Coombs, Reunite Families UK

The minimum income for family visas rose by more than £10,000 to £29,000 from April.

The measures are part of what the Government has previously described as “an accelerated and comprehensive programme of reforms” to address “unsustainable” levels of legal migration to the UK.

The minimum income requirement is due to rise further to £38,700 by early 2025.

It had remained unchanged for more than a decade, and helps to ensure families are self-sufficient and not relying on public funds, whilst making a positive impact on the economy, the Home Office has previously said.

RFUK said the legal challenge will question whether there was a sound legal basis for the decision to increase the minimum income requirement and whether the decision was taken in line with advice.

(Reunite Families UK) is appalled that a decision of such import appears to have been taken by the Home Secretary in such a cavalier manner

Tessa Gregory, Leigh Day

Caroline Coombs, from RFUK, said: “The increases came as a complete surprise to the community we represent – and at a time when people all over the UK have been struggling with a relentless cost of living crisis.

“Whilst they have been working hard to earn and save enough to sponsor their partner, the Government has punished them once again and for many, their dream of a family life together here has been shattered.

“We hope that through the legal case, ministers will pursue a better, more humane family migration policy. One that doesn’t discriminate based on one’s income and instead recognises the value of bi-national couples and families not just for the economy but for our society as a whole.”

Tessa Gregory, a partner at the law firm Leigh Day who is representing RFUK, said: “The decision to increase the minimum income requirement is already having a devastating impact on thousands of families, parents and children who are struggling to come to terms with a future where they are indefinitely separated due to the increased financial threshold.

“Our client, RFUK, is appalled that a decision of such import appears to have been taken by the Home Secretary in such a cavalier manner: without proper analysis; and in breach of critical public law duties such as assessing the impact of the decision on protected groups. RFUK will be asking the Court to quash the decision on the basis that the Home Secretary has acted unlawfully.”

We call on whoever will be our home secretary after July 5 to take the price tag off love as a matter of urgency

Josephine Whitaker-Yilmaz, Praxis

When the April rise came into effect, the Government stressed that the minimum income requirement can also be met through savings or, if the applicant is in the UK already on a different visa, through their additional income.

Josephine Whitaker-Yilmaz, from migrant support charity Praxis, said: “It is disheartening to know that courts have to be involved to make sure our rights are respected – including the right to fall in love and live with our families, together.

“We call on whoever will be our home secretary after July 5 to take the price tag off love as a matter of urgency.”