An expensive legal battle to deport two Albanian criminals who posed as Kosovan refugees to win asylum in Britain will now enter its fifth year after a ruling by the Supreme Court.

Dinjan Hysaj and Agron Bakijasi pretended to be victims of ethnic cleansing when they came to the UK in the 1990s, but were ordered to leave the country when their lies were exposed.

Their lawyers successfully appealed, saying lying about their nationality was not enough to remove British citizenship from them in a case that is set to cost Britain taxpayers £1million in legal aid.

Two Albanian men who posed as Kosovan refugees have won the right to remain in the UK. One of the men, Dinjan Hysaj (pictured) was jailed for glassing a man in a pub

Home Secretary Amber Rudd will need to use different laws to force the pair to leave after judges ruled it was 'not clear when the use of false identity to obtain citizenship by one person can lead to nullification'.

The five Supreme Court justices said: 'In the current cases, neither appellant pretended to be someone he was not.'

The ruling could allow thousands more to stay.

It is thought at least 80,000 refugees from Kosovo fled to the UK in the 90s while escaping war - but thousands of Albanians, including serious criminals, exploited the crisis to claim asylum in this country.

One Albanian, Dinjan Hysaj, 40, won the right to stay in the UK in 1999 but in 2011 was jailed for five years, reports The Sun.

He glassed another drinker in a pub in Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire.

Agron Bakijasi was caught lying about his nationality in 2007 when his partner decided to return to Albania.

But the 44-year-old reapplied using false details and won UK citizenship.

As soon as their lies emerged the Home Secretary ordered both be deported.

But they took their case to the Supreme Court and their lawyers successfully argued that lying to obtain citizenship was not enough to remove it from them.

The Supreme Court ruling could men thousands more Albanians could win the right to stay in the UK

In their ruling, judges said that it was 'not clear when the use of false identity to obtain citizenship by one person can lead to nullification'.

They added: 'In the current cases, neither appellant pretended to be someone he was not.'

The judgement could now be used in similar cases and the Home Office said it will consider its options.