In Onowu, R (on the application of) v First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (extension of time for appealing: principles) (IJR) UKUT 185 (IAC) (31 March 2016) the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) considered the correct approach a Tribunal should take when faced with an application for an extension of time to apply for permission to appeal.
Immigration Barristers' Blog
Welcome to the blog of Richmond Chambers, where our immigration barristers provide updates and commentary on the latest developments in UK immigration law. Contact us to find out how our immigration barristers can help you achieve a successful outcome to your immigration case.
Establishing whether or not someone born on or after 1 January 1983 is a British citizen, or may be registered as a British citizen, can be a complex process – not least because the nationality of at least one of the parents also needs to be established. When that person is born through a surrogacy arrangement matters can become more complex, particularly when the surrogacy arrangement includes an overseas element.
The Free Movement of Persons Directive 2004/38 EC sets out the right of EEA nationals and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the EEA Member States. The Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 (‘2006 Regulations’) (as amended) transpose the Free Movement Directive into UK law. The Regulations describe the rights of EEA nationals and their family members to enter and reside in the UK.
In Tukhas (para 245HD(f): "appropriate salary") Russia UKUT 183 (IAC) (17 March 2016) the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) considered the correct interpretation of paragraph 14 of Appendix J of the Immigration Rules (codes of practice for skilled work) when a decision is being made whether or not an applicant has an appropriate salary for the purposes of extending leave as a Tier 2 migrant, with reference to paragraph 79 of Appendix A.
In January 2016 the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) published its review into the Tier 2 visa category. The Government has now published its response. A number of changes are set out, and all changes are due to be implemented by April 2017, with some being implemented in autumn 2016. The Government has also said that it intends to simplify the relevant Immigration Rules and Tier 2 guidance.
Long waiting lists for the hearing of Tribunal appeals have recently become a key focal point for discussion. Delays in listing inevitably cause added anxiety for the individuals involved and can result in families being separated for longer than they ever may have anticipated. For some individuals there can be irreversible consequences.
Each year, the Home Office is awarded considerable litigation costs by the courts and tribunal. Some applicants fail to pay these costs. They may then make further applications to be granted entry clearance, leave to enter or leave to remain.
British nationality law is often a complex subject and, after 12 November 2015, this is an area which has increased in complexity for citizens of EU Member States who wish to apply for naturalisation as British citizens in accordance with the British Nationality Act 1981 (the ‘BNA1981’).
In the case of R (on the application of Bhudia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (para 284(iv) and (ix)) IJR  UKUT 00025 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal made several helpful comments for those applying for spouse visa extensions, and also judicial review applicants.
Prior to the relevant provisions of the Immigration Act 2014 coming into force in April 2015, individuals who had an immigration application refused which did not bring their leave to an end did not benefit from a right of appeal against the refusal decision. This affected people who had no leave to remain in the UK at the time that they made their application, who would have no right of appeal if an application was refused. Since April 2015, people who are overstayers at the time that they make their applications have been afforded a right of appeal if a human rights claim is refused.
There has been a significant increase in the number of Europeans living in the UK applying for British Citizenships, with many fearing that the country could leave the UK according to solicitors and community leaders.
In an attempt to further curb the percentage of net immigration under the company sponsored Tier 2 route under the Points Based System, the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), independent advisors to the Home Office, have proposed several far reaching changes for the year 2016.
In January 2016, the UK officially launched a new visitor visa scheme. Chinese nationals are now able to apply for a two-year multi-entry visa. The previous standard tourist visa for Chinese nationals was limited to 6 months. The new scheme is therefore four times the normal 6-month limit for a standard general visitor visa.
The landmark and ground breaking case of R (on the application of ZAT and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Article 8 ECHR – Dublin Regulations – interface – proportionality) IJR  UKUT 61 (IAC) was recently reported.
In Keyu & Ors v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs & Anor  UKSC 69,  3 WLR 1665, Supreme Court was invited to reconsider the basis on which the courts review decisions of the executive, and in particular that the traditional Wednesbury rationality basis for challenging executive decisions should be replaced by a more structured and principled challenge based on proportionality. That invitation was declined on the basis that it would be inappropriate for a five-Justice panel of the court to decide the argument, given that it potentially has implications which are profound in constitutional terms and very wide in applicable scope. What was offered was that the answer to the question whether the court should approach a challenged decision by reference to proportionality rather than rationality may depend on the nature of the issue.
Deception is defined within Paragraph 6 of the Immigration Rules as follows:
“Deception” means making false representations or submitting false documents (whether or not material to the application), or failing to disclose material facts.”