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.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Login
    Login Login form
Recent blog posts

The Immigration Rules for Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) settlement can be found at paragraph 245EF. Under the Immigration Rules, Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) migrants can normally apply for settlement once they have spent five years continuously in the UK with leave as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur). However, if certain additional conditions are met, Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visa holders may be eligible to apply for accelerated ILR after a continuous period of 3 years.

Posted by on in Deportation

In NA (Pakistan) v SSHD [2016] EWCA Civ 662, the Court of Appeal corrected the obvious drafting error in section 117C(3) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (as amended by the Immigration Act 2014), and ruled that foreign criminal ‘medium offenders’ (those with sentences of between one and four years’ imprisonment) have the same fall back protection as ‘serious offenders’ (those sentenced to four years or more) when seeking to resist deportation by reliance on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The same words that appear in s117C(6) and para 398 of the 2014 Immigration Rules need to be read into section 117C(3) so as properly to reflect Parliament’s true meaning that where medium offenders do not fall within a private or family life exception, they can still resist deportation where there are “very compelling circumstances over and above” those exceptions.

One of the main requirements to be satisfied as part of an initial application for entry clearance or leave to remain as a Tier 1 Entrepreneur is to demonstrate that the applicant has the required level of funds to invest in a new or existing business in the UK.

Posted by on in Uncategorized

As with any immigration matter, when making a nationality application or claim it is of course necessary to provide relevant evidence to corroborate and support the application or claim being made. Whilst the evidence that may be required will inevitably vary from case to case, the following provides some general guidance that may assist.

The Upper Tribunal has once again looked at the Rules relating to the Entrepreneur category, in a determination which focusses on the availability of funds to invest in a UK business, specifically, where the funding is provided by a Venture Capital Firm.

The Home Office Modernised Guidance on direct family members of EEA nationals (of 29 September 2015) provides guidance for decision makers who are assessing whether a marriage between an EEA citizen and a third country national is genuine or one of convenience. A party to a marriage of convenience is not a ‘family member’ for the purposes of the EEA regulations.

The Brexit referendum vote announced on 24 June 2016 came as a shock to many, but has no immediate impact on the rights of EU nationals and their family members in the UK.

Figures released by the Office for National Statistics on 25 August 2016 reveal that the number of Tier 1 (Investor) and Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visas granted in the second quarter of 2016 remained broadly stable when compared with the number granted in both the previous quarter and the same quarter in 2015. However, overall the refusal rate for both Tier 1 (Investor) and Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visa applications has increased.

Posted by on in EU Law

The European Commission has recently presented proposals to complete the reform of the Common European Asylum System.

The first quarterly report of 2016 scrutinising the work of Home Office Immigration Directorates has been published by the Home Affairs Committee.

The Court of Appeal, composed of Lord Justice Tomlinson and Lady Justice Rafferty DBE, heard argument in CT (Vietnam) [2016] EWCA Civ 488 on 5 May 2016. This was an appeal from the decision of the Upper Tribunal, whose outcome protected CT from deportation.

In the case of Bilal Ahmed, the Upper tribunal held that where an applicant had made an application for a residence card as the husband or wife of an EEA national but has no other basis of stay, and where his application was refused on the basis that his marriage was one of convenience, the applicant could be removed while his appeal against that refusal was pending.

The Immigration Rules provide those with United Kingdom ancestry with a route to settlement in the UK. The relevant provisions are set out within paragraph 186 of the Immigration Rules and this application can only be made from overseas; it is not possible to apply for leave to remain, or to switch into this category, from within the UK.

Posted by on in Settlement in the UK

Eligibility for settlement as a Tier 2 Migrant can vary depending on when you applied for your visa. If you are eligible for settlement, the main requirements are set out here.

Section 2 of the EU Referendum Act 2015 set out entitlement to vote in the 23 June 2016 EU referendum:

Save for visitors and those authorised to obtain leave to enter the UK by passing through an automated gate, the statutory power to give or refuse leave to enter the UK and to give leave to remain or to vary any (duration of or conditions attached to) a person’s leave to remain; must be exercised by notice in writing given to the person affected: section 3(3)(a) and 4(1) of the Immigration Act 1971.

The Immigration Act 2014 resulted in the loss of appeal rights to the independent Immigration and Asylum Tribunal for many immigration decisions. Individuals can now seek an administrative review in place of an appeal.

Posted by on in EU Law

The Court of Justice of the European Union has given its ruling in a case brought by the European Commission against the UK over its policy of refusing access to certain benefits to non-British EU citizens.

As you will be aware, the outcome of the EU Referendum held in the UK on 23 June 2016 is that the United Kingdom has voted to leave the EU.

In the judgment of Rajendran (s117B – family life) [2016] UKUT 00138 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal (comprising Upper Tribunal Judges Storey and Perkins) reviewed the provisions of section 117B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (as amended) (the ‘2002 Act’) relating to the ‘little weight’ provisions within section 117B(4) and (5) in the context of precarious family life cases.
 

Enquiry form

Invalid firstname input
Invalid surname
Invalid Input
Invalid telephone number
Invalid file, only DOC and PDF are allowed. Attach a file if it supports your case. Only .doc or .pdf files accepted.
Invalid Input

Invalid Input

Please enter the characters below.

Please enter the characters below.
Invalid Input

Client Testimonials

  • “Throughout the process the quality of advice we received was excellent…”

    Tom Gaydon – granted a UK spouse visa

    More testimonials

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Connect with us       
Richmond Chambers Immigration Barristers
5 out of 5 stars 100 Google+ Reviews