The post Public Law Project Annual Conference 2026 appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Judicial review: Heads of challenge appeared first on Public Law Project.

• Language and cultural barriers are undermining access to justice in immigration and asylum tribunals.
• Interpretation errors and misunderstandings do affect evidence, credibility and case outcomes.
• Applicants without legal representation face the greatest disadvantage in navigating a complex system.
• PLP is calling for stronger interpretation services, cultural awareness and procedural support to make justice genuinely accessible.

Read the report here.

Access to justice depends on more than having a right to a hearing. People must be able to understand proceedings, communicate their experiences, present evidence, and participate effectively in decisions that may profoundly affect their lives. When language barriers, cultural misunderstandings, or procedural obstacles prevent this from happening, the fairness and accuracy of legal decision-making can be undermined. 

In a new report by PLP, Cultural, Linguistic and Procedural Barriers to Access to Justice in Immigration and Asylum Tribunals – Report 1: Language, Evidence and Procedure, Selbi Durdiyeva examines how these challenges affect people navigating the immigration and asylum system and what can be done to address them. 

Drawing on an analysis of 271 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) decisions issued over the past two years, alongside hearing observations and interviews with legal representatives, interpreters and intermediaries, the report explores how procedural fairness operates in practice. 

The findings show that interpretation and translation are often treated as administrative services rather than essential components of fair proceedings. Yet tribunal decisions demonstrate that misunderstandings, translation errors and failures to account for linguistic differences can influence credibility assessments and, ultimately, case outcomes. 

The report also highlights the importance of cultural and contextual understanding when assessing evidence. Immigration and asylum claims frequently require decision-makers to engage with unfamiliar political, social, religious and administrative contexts. Tribunal decisions reveal that misunderstandings of these contexts can contribute to procedural errors and undermine confidence in decision-making. 

The research further demonstrates that effective participation is closely linked to access to quality legal representation. Applicants who are unrepresented, or who receive inadequate legal support, face significant disadvantages in navigating a complex legal system, particularly where language and cultural barriers are also present. 

While the report identifies many examples of careful and conscientious decision-making, it argues that procedural fairness cannot be achieved through legal safeguards alone. Fairness also depends on the practical conditions that enable people to participate meaningfully in proceedings, including high-quality interpretation, careful engagement with evidence, cultural awareness and adequate support structures. 

PLP recommends that strengthening linguistic, cultural and procedural sensitivity is not only important for protecting individual rights but also for improving the overall functioning of the immigration and asylum system. Its recommendations, directed at the Ministry of Justice, HM Courts & Tribunals Service, the Judicial College and the Home Office, focus on improving guidance, training, interpretation services and support for applicants to help ensure that justice is both accessible and effective in practice. 

This is the first of two reports on the importance of cultural awareness and understanding in immigration and asylum tribunals. The second report focuses on family and private life, LGBTQ+ identity, and trauma, mental health and vulnerability. 

Read the report here.

The post Cultural, linguistic and procedural barriers to access to justice in immigration and asylum tribunals appeared first on Public Law Project.

In May 2026, the Public Law Project (PLP) submitted evidence in response, raising serious concerns about the independence of the new body and the assumptions behind them. 

Read the evidence here

Summary

PLP argues that the IAB risks undermining fairness, independence, and the quality of decision-making in asylum appeals. In particular, the proposals would move away from the current specialist tribunal system, where legally qualified judges are appointed through an independent process, towards a model that could include decision-makers without legal training, such as civil servants or local authority figures. We are concerned that this would significantly weaken judicial independence in cases that are often complex and life-changing.

The response also highlights wider pressures in the asylum and immigration system that the proposals do not address. Many people already face hearings without legal representation due to the ongoing crisis in immigration legal aid, and we warn that increasing reliance on remote or paper-based hearings could further disadvantage those most in need of support.

Instead of introducing a new appeals body, PLP calls for a more joined-up, system-wide approach to reform. This would include improving the quality of initial Home Office decisions, expanding access to early legal advice, and strengthening capacity across all the essential elements of the system — including legal aid providers, interpreters, expert witnesses, the Home Office and the courts. Evidence shows that a significant proportion of asylum decisions are overturned on appeal, suggesting that improving initial decision-making and legal support would be a more effective way to reduce delays and backlogs than redesigning the appeals structure itself.

Photo: Andy Thornley/Flickr

The post Call for evidence: Independent Appeals Body (IAB) appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Report launch: Culture and language in the Immigration and Asylum Tribunal appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Advocacy and public law in the immigration and asylum tribunals appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Advocacy and public law in the tribunals series appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Advocacy and public law in the information tribunals appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Introduction to tribunal representation appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Public Law and the Planet – online version appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Morning update: AI and automated decision making, litigation and law reform appeared first on Public Law Project.

The post Online JR Academy February 2026 appeared first on Public Law Project.