The UK Government’s proposed changes to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) have sparked growing concern among migrants, employers, and immigration professionals, with a potential legal challenge now being considered.
On 2 November 2026, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced the Government’s new Earned Settlement framework, marking a significant shift in how migrants will qualify for permanent residence in the UK.
Under the proposed system, settlement will be based on contribution, conduct and integration, rather than simply the number of years spent in the country.
What are the key changes?
The Government intends to introduce different qualifying periods depending on an individual’s circumstances:
- 3 years: For the highest earners (over £125,140) and certain highly skilled migrants.
- 5 years: For those earning over £50,270 and qualifying public service professionals, including doctors, nurses and teachers.
- 10 years: The new standard qualifying period for most other migrants.
- 20 years or longer: For certain individuals who have breached immigration rules.
Applicants will also need to satisfy mandatory requirements relating to criminal history, English language proficiency, government debt, the Life in the UK Test, and National Insurance contributions, subject to applicable exemptions.
Certain groups, including family members of British citizens and Hong Kong BN(O) visa holders, will retain their existing settlement pathways. Specific transitional protections have also been announced for qualifying care workers and certain healthcare and education professionals.
A potential legal challenge
On 9 November 2026, the Skilled Worker Justice Alliance (SWJA) announced preparations for a potential judicial review of the proposed reforms.
The organisation argues that the changes should not retrospectively affect Skilled Worker visa holders who entered or switched into the route before 12 May 2025, or their dependants.
SWJA is calling on the Home Office to preserve the existing 5-year settlement pathway for these individuals, subject to the salary requirements and transitional provisions previously applicable to them.
Its concerns centre on 3 potential public-law issues:
- Substantive retrospectivity: Whether the reforms unfairly alter the position of migrants already progressing towards settlement.
- Legitimate expectation: Whether individuals can reasonably rely on the settlement framework under which they entered the UK.
- Procedural unfairness: Whether sufficient consideration has been given to those affected by the changes.
SWJA is currently fundraising to obtain an independent written opinion from a King’s Counsel specialising in public law.
Importantly, no judicial review has yet been confirmed. Whether proceedings are brought will depend on legal advice, available evidence, and the final Government decisions.
Under the proposed system, settlement will be based on contribution, conduct and integration, rather than simply the number of years spent in the country.
What does this mean for employers and migrants?
For employers sponsoring overseas workers, the reforms could significantly affect workforce planning, sponsorship costs, and employee retention.
For migrants already approaching their fifth year of residence, a longer qualifying period could mean additional visa extensions, increased costs, and prolonged uncertainty.
The Government has confirmed that the reforms will be introduced in phases, with changes to the Immigration Rules expected from December 2026 and implementation during 2027.
Until the relevant changes take effect, the existing settlement rules continue to apply.
Should the Government be allowed to move the goalposts?
Governments must be able to change immigration policy to reflect changing economic and social priorities. However, where those changes affect individuals who have already entered the UK lawfully and have structured their lives around an existing pathway to settlement, questions of fairness and legitimate expectation inevitably arise.
Many migrants have made significant financial, professional, and family commitments on the understanding that settlement would be available after five years of continuous residence. While immigration systems may evolve, the impact of altering eligibility requirements partway through that process raises broader questions about certainty and predictability.
If contribution and integration are intended to underpin the new system, it is worth considering whether migrants who have spent years living and working in the UK should be disadvantaged by rules that did not exist when they began their settlement journey. Equally, should access to permanence depend primarily on income thresholds, or should long-term contribution carry greater weight in the assessment?
Need guidance on the latest immigration changes?
Need advice on how the latest immigration changes could affect your organisation? Whether you’re recruiting overseas talent or managing sponsorship requirements, our Immigration team can help. Contact our immigration team today to discuss the impact on your business.
