Scotland’s Highest Civil Court intervenes to stop Home Office extinguishing Gaza family’s hopes of being reunited

Last month, a Palestinian family from Gaza secured an important interim win in Scotland's highest civil court, the Court of Session in Edinburgh after Lord Braid granted urgent protection preventing the Home Office from allowing their refugee family reunion case to collapse.

This matters far beyond one family. Other Palestinian families face the same closed loop: approved in principle for family reunion, but unable to leave Gaza to complete biometrics because there is no safe route out. When the deadline expires, their applications collapse despite the Home Office already accepting they qualify in principle.

The UK sponsor in this case, Zakaria A, lives in Glasgow and has recognised  refugee status in the UK because the Home Office accepted that he could not safely return to Gaza.

He contacted Positive Action in Housing in desperation after paying hundreds of pounds on the understanding that a family reunion application would be submitted for his wife and children. Zakaria did not understand the legal process and it was only much later that no application was submitted. When probed, his then "legal representative" informed us that the process could not move forward until biometrics were completed outside Gaza, in Cairo or Jordan.

We intervened to help his wife and three sons, who were trapped in Gaza, apply under refugee family reunion rules.

His wife and youngest son then received positive predetermination decisions. This means the Home Office had already decided they met the requirements in principle and would likely be granted entry clearance, subject only to biometric enrolment and final checks.

Their two older teenage sons were refused because they were just over 18 by the time the applications were submitted. However, they were minors when the war on Gaza began, remain dependent on their mother, and continue to live together as one family unit. Their refusals are under appeal and after much soul searching, Zakaria's wife and youngest son have agreed to leave in order to join Zakaria.

But there is no biometric facility inside Gaza.

To complete the process, Zakaria’s wife and youngest son have to leave Gaza and attend a visa application centre in Jordan to provide fingerprints and photographs. 

But they cannot leave Gaza without assistance from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and the Foreign Office did not make a decision on whether to help them leave temporarily for biometrics.

At the same time, the Home Office imposed a strict 240-day deadline for biometric enrolment. That deadline runs from the date of the original application, not from the date of the predetermination decision.

In this case, Zakaria's family applied in August 2025, but the positive predetermination decision was not issued until September 2025. They lost valuable time before they were even in a position to try to complete biometrics, despite there being no way to do biometrics inside Gaza.

This created a closed loop. They could not complete biometrics without leaving Gaza, and they could not leave Gaza without government assistance. While both departments prevaricated, the deadline expired.

The double standards are stark. During the Ukraine war, thousands of Ukrainians were allowed to travel to the UK first and complete biometrics after arrival. That same flexibility has not been offered to Palestinian families fleeing Gaza. A simple biometric deferral by the Home Secretary would allow evacuation for family reunion cases, but that discretion has not been used.

Positive Action in Housing spent more than 100 hours preparing the family reunion case, making detailed submissions to the Home Office, the Foreign Office and the Unsafe Journeys Team.

As time ran out, we referred the case to Ewan MacKay of McGlashan MacKay Solicitors in Glasgow, who swiftly raised judicial review proceedings in the Court of Session, with Bilaal Shabbir, Advocate, appearing for the family.

Two linked cases were brought: one against the Home Office for refusing to extend the biometric deadline, and one against the Foreign Office for failing to make a decision on consular assistance.

Lord Braid found there was a prima facie case against the Home Office and granted ad interim orders protecting the family’s position.

The Home Office was then ordered to accept fresh applications without new fees, treat them as a continuation of the original applications, preserve the original family reunion rules, keep the earlier predetermination decisions alive, and extend the biometric period by a further 240 days.

The judge stopped the Home Office from extinguishing the family reunion claim.

This is the first real legal interruption of a system that has trapped many Palestinian families in administrative limbo. It shows these decisions can be challenged. We are still pushing ahead on several other cases.

The case against the Foreign Office is still live and judgment is awaited on whether its continuing failure to decide was unlawful.