The High Court has ruled against the Home Office in R (Moon Fish Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2026] EWHC 2289 (Admin), highlighting the importance of procedural fairness when revoking sponsor licences.
The judgment, delivered on 4 September 2026, demonstrates why employers should seek advice if they believe the Home Office has acted unfairly or incorrectly applied its guidance.
Background of the case
Moon Fish Ltd’s sponsor licence was revoked after the Home Office identified that a sponsored worker had received payments below the salary stated on his Certificate of Sponsorship (CoS).
The lower payments resulted from a permitted period of unpaid compassionate leave, which the company had failed to report to the Home Office.
The Home Office treated this as grounds for mandatory revocation. Moon Fish Ltd challenged the decision through judicial review.
What did the High Court decide?
The Court found that the Home Office’s decision was unlawful for two main reasons.
1. Failure to follow procedural fairness
The Home Office had not clearly identified the specific underpayments causing concern or given the company a fair opportunity to explain them before revoking its licence.
2. Incorrect application of sponsor guidance
The Court distinguished between an actual change in a sponsored worker’s salary and lower payments arising from permitted unpaid leave.
Although the company had breached its reporting obligations, this did not establish the particular mandatory revocation ground relied upon.
The Court quashed the decision and returned the matter to the Home Office for reconsideration. You can read the full Moon Fish judgment on the National Archives website.
What does this mean for employers?
The judgment provides important lessons for sponsor licence holders:
- A fair opportunity to respond: Sponsors should be given a fair opportunity to address the substance of the Home Office’s concerns.
- Correct application of the guidance: Reporting failures must be assessed under the appropriate provisions.
- The opportunity to challenge: Judicial review may be available where a decision is unlawful.
The judgment does not remove sponsors’ reporting obligations or prevent enforcement action for reporting failures.
Employers should maintain effective procedures for monitoring salaries, absences and relevant changes. The Home Office’s sponsor duties and compliance guidance explains the reporting, record-keeping and other responsibilities associated with holding a licence.
How Aristone Solicitors can assist
Our immigration team supports businesses with visa applications, sponsor licence compliance, suspension and revocation matters, including Pre-Action Protocol representations and judicial review challenges.
Our support extends beyond obtaining visas. As your business’s immigration partner, we can advise on managing sponsored employees and the implications of proposed changes to their employment.
If you are considering approving unpaid leave, changing pay or working hours, altering job duties or ending employment, speak to us before taking action. We can help you understand your sponsorship obligations and assess the appropriate next steps.
Frequently asked questions
Can I appeal a sponsor licence revocation?
There is no statutory right of appeal. However, judicial review may be possible where the Home Office has acted unlawfully. The merits of a challenge depend on the reasons for revocation, the evidence and the decision-making process.
What should I do if my sponsor licence is revoked?
Seek legal advice promptly. Keep the decision letter, Home Office correspondence and relevant employment, payroll and absence records available for review.
Judicial review claims must generally be filed promptly and, in any event, within three months of the grounds first arising. Following the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review does not stop that time limit running. Do not assume you can wait three months before seeking advice.
Can a sponsored worker take unpaid leave?
Unpaid leave can be permitted, but the reason and duration matter. For Skilled Workers, sponsors must normally stop sponsorship where unpaid or reduced-pay absence exceeds four weeks in a calendar year, unless an applicable exception or other permitted basis allows sponsorship to continue.
Check the position before approving extended unpaid leave. The Home Office’s guidance on unpaid leave and salary reductions explains the relevant requirements.
Do I need to report a sponsored worker’s unpaid leave?
Certain unpaid or reduced-pay absences must be reported. Do not assume that approving leave removes your reporting obligations. Check the applicable requirements, keep supporting records and seek advice if you are unsure.
Can I reduce a sponsored worker’s salary?
Only where the applicable immigration requirements allow it. You may need to report the reduction, assign a new Certificate of Sponsorship or ensure the worker obtains new immigration permission before implementing it. Seek advice before changing salary or working hours.
What changes must sponsor licence holders report?
Reportable changes include certain salary reductions, significant employment changes, specified absences and employment ending, as well as certain changes to the business itself. Deadlines vary, so check the requirements for the particular event.
When should I seek immigration advice about a sponsored employee?
Seek advice before making decisions about unpaid leave, pay, working hours, job duties or ending employment. You should also contact us promptly if you discover a reporting error or receive a Home Office compliance enquiry.
Early advice can help you understand your options and address potential problems before they escalate.
Can Aristone Solicitors provide ongoing immigration support for my business?
Yes. We can support your business with visa applications and continuing advice on sponsorship duties, reporting obligations and managing sponsored employees.
Whether you need advice on an individual issue or an ongoing immigration partner for your business, contact Aristone Solicitors to discuss your requirements.
Case reference: R (Moon Fish Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWHC 2289 (Admin), 4 September 2026.
Aristone Solicitors
Luton Office: +44 1582 383 888
London Office: +44 2034 393 888
St Albans Office: +44 1727 519 888
Or reach out via our online contact form – a member of our immigration team will respond promptly.
