Skilled worker encountered “volunteering” loses challenge to cancellation of leave

A health care worker who was detained after being encountered by immigration enforcement while serving customers in a convenience store has been unsuccessful in a judicial review challenging the decision to cancel her leave, detain and remove her from the UK. The case is R (Andrews) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 64 (Admin). 

The claimant entered the UK on a skilled worker (health care) visa on 8 June 2023 and was due to start work on 1 July 2023. On 28 June 2023 immigration enforcement encountered her behind the counter of an off-licence store serving customers. The claimant said that she was helping out as a volunteer in her friend’s store although the notice cancelling her leave on 3 November 2023 stated “You claimed to not be aware you were working illegally and stated to officers that you had run out of funds and a friend had offered a temporary job to tide you over – this was taken to be an admission of working.”

The claimant was detained on 19 September 2023 and issued with a notice of removal on 18 December 2023. Removal was intended to take place on 30 December but interim relief was granted following the judicial review application. Permission was later granted, with the judge noting that there was no evidence that the claimant had been working for pay. The store owner had been issued with a “No Action Notice” which the claimant asserted was evidence that the Home Secretary had accepted that she was a volunteer, and volunteering was permitted in the guidance for skilled workers which currently states “You can also do unpaid voluntary work”.

The High Court referred to the definition of “voluntary work” in the immigration rules which states that it has the same meaning as in the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. The position was summarised as:

to be a voluntary worker within the meaning given by section 44 of the NMWA 1998, an individual is not merely working for no remuneration. The worker has to be employed by a charity, voluntary organisation, an associated fund-raising body or a statutory body who is not entitled to any monetary payments of any description and no benefits in kind.

The rules and primary legislation take precedence over the guidance. The judicial review failed as the court held that the decision making process had been clear and the discretion to cancel permission considered properly. The decisions to remove and detain were based on the lawful cancellation decision and also failed.