Reported by Weng Patrick Atokor l Journalist at Weng Global
A United Kingdom Upper Tribunal has rejected the Home Office’s attempt to deport Nigerian national Tunde Lawal Alao, who was previously sentenced to 31 months in prison for conspiracy to defraud involving the production of fake driving licences.
The decision, issued on September 1, 2026, followed an appeal by the UK Secretary of State for the Home Department against an earlier First-tier Tribunal ruling that had allowed Alao’s immigration appeal. The Upper Tribunal found no material error of law in the earlier decision.
Tribunal finds no sufficiently serious present threat
The case centred not on whether Alao had committed the fraud — that conviction was not overturned — but on whether his circumstances at the time of the immigration proceedings met the legal requirements for deportation.
The Upper Tribunal was presided over by Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Solanki. The judgment identified Alao as a Nigerian citizen who had arrived in the UK around 2004 or 2005 and last entered the country in 2006.
Alao later applied under the EU Settlement Scheme in August 2020 as a non-EU national dependant of his EU-national wife. He was granted limited leave to remain in February 2021.
His criminal conviction followed in June 2022, when he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud over the production of fake driving licences between 2019 and January 2022.
He was sentenced to 31 months in prison and ordered to pay a £149 victim surcharge. He was released on August 28, 2023.
The conviction remains an important part of the case. The Upper Tribunal did not declare the underlying criminal conduct lawful or overturn the sentence.
Instead, the immigration proceedings examined whether Alao’s subsequent conduct demonstrated that he continued to meet the legal threshold for deportation.
Employment became an important factor
Following his release from prison, Alao obtained part-time employment and remained with the same employer from October 2023.
Court records show that his employer provided evidence supporting his continued residence in the UK. The employer described Alao as an office assistant and client coordinator and said he had contributed to the organisation’s operations since October 2023.
The employer also indicated that Alao’s continued employment was expected and that his skills and experience had become useful to the business.
The evidence was considered by the First-tier Tribunal and subsequently examined by the Upper Tribunal after the Home Office challenged the earlier decision.
The Upper Tribunal found that the First-tier Tribunal had properly considered the evidence concerning Alao’s employment and had not made the alleged legal error advanced by the Home Office.
Risk of reoffending considered
Another significant issue was Alao’s risk of committing further offences.
Reporting on the judgment, The Punch said the tribunal considered a calculated risk of reconviction of 6 per cent within one year and 12 per cent within two years, describing the figures as being within the low range.
The judgment also indicated that the risk could potentially be reduced through interventions addressing the behaviour associated with his offending.
The tribunal therefore considered Alao’s conduct after his release alongside the seriousness of his original offence.
This distinction is important because the decision does not erase his criminal record. Rather, it concerns the separate immigration question of whether his personal conduct constituted the level of continuing threat required under the applicable legal framework.
Home Office challenged earlier ruling
The Home Office had challenged the First-tier Tribunal’s December 2025 decision, arguing that the lower tribunal had made errors in assessing issues including the seriousness of the offence, the risk of further offending and the sustainability of Alao’s employment.
The Upper Tribunal considered those arguments but concluded that the First-tier Tribunal had adequately considered the relevant evidence.
On the employment issue, for example, the Upper Tribunal noted that the lower tribunal had relied on an unchallenged letter from Alao’s employer and evidence indicating that the employment was expected to continue.
After reviewing the grounds of appeal, Judge Solanki concluded that the First-tier Tribunal had not made a material error of law.
The Home Office’s appeal was therefore dismissed.
Seriousness of fraud still recognised
The tribunal’s decision should not be interpreted as a finding that the original fraud was insignificant.
Alao pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud relating to the production of fake driving licences. He received a substantial custodial sentence, demonstrating the seriousness with which the criminal justice system treated the offence.
The immigration proceedings instead required the tribunal to assess his circumstances after the conviction and release.
The judgment considered the public interest in protecting society from fraud and the government’s interest in removing foreign nationals who have committed serious offences. It also considered the broader public interest in preventing unlawful immigration and abuse of immigration rules.
Against those considerations, the tribunal examined Alao’s conduct since his release, including his employment and assessment of the likelihood of further offending.
What the ruling means
The case illustrates the distinction between a criminal conviction and a subsequent immigration decision.
Alao’s conviction for conspiracy to defraud remains intact. The Upper Tribunal did not reopen or overturn the criminal proceedings.
Instead, the tribunal upheld an earlier immigration decision because it found that the Home Office had not demonstrated the necessary continuing threat on the evidence considered by the immigration tribunals.
The judgment consequently does not establish that foreign nationals convicted of serious offences cannot be deported from the UK. Deportation cases remain dependent on their individual facts, the applicable immigration law and the evidence presented to the tribunal.
What happens next
The September 1 Upper Tribunal decision represents the outcome of the Home Office’s appeal against the earlier First-tier Tribunal ruling.
The published judgment states that the Upper Tribunal found no material error of law in the First-tier Tribunal’s decision.
Based on the ruling currently available, Alao will not be deported on the basis of the Home Office appeal decided by the Upper Tribunal.
The case also highlights the importance of post-conviction conduct in immigration proceedings, with the tribunal considering factors including employment, rehabilitation-related interventions and assessed risk alongside the seriousness of the original offence.
For Nigerian citizens living abroad, the case is also a reminder that criminal convictions and immigration consequences can involve separate legal processes. The outcome of one process does not automatically determine the result of another.
Weng Global – Stories beyond borders
Sources
- UK Upper Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber, Tunde Lawal Alao v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Case No. UI-2026-000835, decision issued September 1, 2026.
- The Punch, “UK judge stops deportation of Nigerian man,” September 26, 2026.
- Daily Justice, report on the Upper Tribunal decision.
