Brazilian tourist unlawfully detained after “volunteering” in a hostel

The High Court has held that a Brazilian tourist had her visitor visa unlawfully cancelled and that she was unlawfully detained for eight weeks, from 12 September to 8 November 2024. The case is R (Thadeu) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 736 (Admin).

The claimant is a Brazilian national who entered the UK as a visitor on 1 August 2024. On 29 August 2024, having seen an advertisement on Instagram, she signed an agreement with Saint James Backpackers to volunteer at the hostel for 30 hours a week and receive accommodation and two meals a day.

On 12 September 2024 immigration officers attended the hostel and concluded that the claimant was working in breach of her conditions of leave. Her leave was cancelled and she was detained. The decision letter of 12 September 2024 referred to an old version of the immigration rules and a second decision letter was served on the claimant on 7 October 2024.

On 22 September 2024 the claimant’s solicitors sent a pre-action letter stating that the breach was a genuine mistake and that she had not understood that the volunteering would be in breach of the immigration rules.

An application for judicial review was lodged. It was submitted that the decision letter went no further than stating that there had been a breach and the Home Secretary had “failed to take account of the mandatory guidance to consider all relevant facts and circumstances, before making the decision to cancel her leave”. It was also argued that the use of discretion had not been engaged with and that the second decision letter had failed to engage with evidence that had been provided to the Home Office by this time.

The court agreed, describing the procedure followed on 12 September 2024 as “slipshod”. The court considered that it could not be said that it was “highly likely that the outcome for the claimant would not have been substantially different if the SSHD had considered the reasons for, and circumstances of, her breach of the Immigration Rules, before taking the decision to cancel the claimant’s leave”.

The decision to cancel the claimant’s leave was quashed and it was also held that she had been unlawfully detained from 12 September 2024 to 8 November 2024. The claim was transferred to the county court for an assessment of damages.