British Lawyer

29 January 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> UKVI Document Reduction Pilot - Appendix FM applications From the UK BA: "Following our meeting recently in which we discussed Document Rationalisation, I thought this would be a good time to update you on our Appendix FM project and some of the work that we are doing to reduce the number of unnecessary documents submitted. Firstly, I promised you some feedback from the settlement Document Reduction pilot in India. The pilot ran for a total of 6 weeks and the main findings were: · Customers were invited to take part on a voluntary basis and as expected, uptake was quite low. We received a total of 25 applications, however, 6 of these applications were invalid as they did not meet the pilot criteria. · 35 customers chose not to take part in the pilot. The main reason being - the sponsor or representative collated the supporting documents for them and they were instructed that all the documents must be scanned, there was also a perception amongst these customers that the more documents that are submitted, the stronger the application and greater chance of success. · Of the 19 valid applications, none were scanned in line with the pilot guidance and therefore could not be assessed by the Decision Makers as part of this pilot. Whilst at initial look it seems that the pilot was unsuccessful, we weren’t disappointed by this as it actually confirmed our initial thoughts on some of the challenges that we will face around ingrained customer behaviour and perception. It also confirmed that the Appendix FM route is a very complex one and our commercial partners require much more support to identify specific cohorts of FM customers and support with scanning documents in the required order. Following the India pilot, we have re-focused our efforts and are planning two further settlement initiatives to support document rationalisation. Auto-email message: There will be an auto-email message sent to all Appendix FM customers from the online customer journey. The message informs customers that we will no longer accept the unnecessary documents listed and in addition to this we will only accept a maximum of 10 photographs. The benefit of sending this message out from the online customer journey is that it gives customers, sponsors and legal representatives the opportunity to read and understand our requirement before the customer attends their appointment at the VAC. This auto-email went live on the 26th January 2020 and will initially only be sent to Appendix FM customers attending appointments at one of the VACs in India. This will reviewed before being rolled out more widely. Document Reduction at the UK scanning hubs: We will be duplicating the India pilot at the VFS UK scanning hubs. The advantage of doing this in the UK as opposed to overseas is that in the majority of Appendix FM cases, the sponsor or the legal representative will be submitting the documents in person at one of the UK scanning hubs and VFS hub staff will be able to support them through the process. It also means that our staff in Sheffield will be able to provide direct and immediate support to the hub staff with time zones not being a practical barrier to this. All customers meeting the pilot criteria will be expected to take part – this will not be voluntary basis. The pilot will be launched on the 4th February 2020 at the VFS scanning hub in London with the remaining VFS hubs going live shortly afterwards. I have sent you the notice that will be displayed at the scanning hubs. From an operational perspective, rest assured that we are working closely with our Decision Makers to analyse the impact of both these initiatives and to ensure that adverse decisions are not made on the basis that these documents have not being submitted. As we’ve discussed, Decision Makers are encouraged to request documents when appropriate and on the rare occasion that they need to see one of these unnecessary documents, they will contact the customer to request it before a decision is made." >>> Home Office can detain migrants for up to five weeks after law requires that they be released: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/36.html The Court of Appeal has given judgment in R (AC (Algeria)) v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 36. The case is about “grace periods” in unlawful detention claims. A grace period, as described by Lord Justice Irwin in his judgment, is "that period of time allowed to the Secretary of State, once detention has ceased to comply with the Hardial Singh principles, to make suitable arrangements for release.". >>> Government advised not to bother with points based attempt for migrants with job offers: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-mac-report-points-based-system-and-salary-thresholds The government should think twice about re-introducing a points based immigration system after Brexit, and lower the minimum salary necessary to get a work visa, the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has recommended. In a report published recently, the MAC says that the existing Tier 2 (General) work visa system should be left intact, with employers continuing to sponsor workers with a job offer. By contrast, Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) visas could be allocated using a points calculation, if the government is really so keen on it. Key recommendations include: - Retaining the Tier 2 (General) skilled worker route, because “the combination of skill eligibility and a salary threshold works well for an employer-driven system”. - Reducing the minimum salary threshold to around £25,600, instead of the £30,000 recommended in the MAC’s last major report. - Turning Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) into a points based route for skilled workers without a job offer, since at the moment it “does not work well” anyway = aka Tier 1(General) pre-2011, is not it ? While the Conservatives have plugged the idea of an “Australia-style points based system” as a radical new departure, the MAC knows that we have been here before. It reviewed the previous use of pure points-based routes in the UK, including the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme, Tier 1 (General), and the early days of Tier 2 (General). The data is extremely limited, making firm conclusions difficult, but “the scraps of information available” suggest that “a sizeable proportion did not end up working in highly-skilled jobs as was intended”. As such, the MAC cautions, “any changes should not repeat mistakes made in UK systems in the past but draw on best practice from other countries”. Such best practice would “include a cap [on numbers] and the use of the Expression of Interest system”. The economists try to steer ministers away from interfering with Tier 2, partly because employers think being able to sponsor individual workers from overseas is rather important. Instead, their report says that the place for points is Tier 1, in particular the Exceptional Talent route which “does not work well” and is “failing to meet all its objectives”. Given these problems, if the Government wants to have a PBS route on entry, it could make sense to re-orient Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) with the aim of increasing the numbers though the challenge is to do this without significantly affecting quality. This may be regarded as unfortunate timing, since the government is pushing through unrelated reforms to Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) on Thursday. But if the report’s approach were adopted, the resulting mixture of sponsorship and unsponsored migration would reflect how countries with points based immigration systems do things. In Australia, Canada and New Zealand, the MAC calculates, people arriving without a confirmed job offer through points based routes only account for about 40-60% of economic migration. Those nations still use employer sponsorship as well. The report is expected to be influential in the design of the UK’s post-Brexit immigration system, under which EU citizens will come under the same visa rules as non-EU citizens, but those rules will be made more liberal overall. That includes a lowering of the minimum salary required for a work visa, from £30,000 today to under £26,000 (the exact number depends on a fairly technical calculation). This recommendation is not a surprise, in the sense that the MAC had previously recommended keeping the threshold at £30,000 and was told to try again. The post-Brexit dispensation taking shape is expected to “result in a lower level of immigration, a lower rate of growth in population, employment and GDP”. But there is a glaring caveat not reflected in some of the breathless coverage of today’s report. MAC chief Professor Alan Manning writes that “almost all of these estimated impacts at the macro level are small”. In other words, while the end of free movement has real human impacts, the MAC does not think that it has particularly significant economic effects. The report also reveals that Professor Manning is not being kept on as Chair of the Migration Advisory Committee, despite his desire for a second term. The government is advertising for a replacement. The MAC's recommendations in full + some of the Legal Centre's comments "Points-based systems 1. We recommend retaining the existing framework for Tier 2 (General). 2. If government wants to have a PBS route on entry, it should consider modifying Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) in the following way: • There should be an overall annual cap on those admitted; • The route should operate on an expression of interest basis creating a pool of migrants interested in coming to the UK; • There should be a monthly draw from this pool with those selected invited to submit a full application; - What is this ? A visa lottery ? • The selection of those invited to apply should be based on those who have the highest number of points in the pool using a points-based system with tradeable points; • There should also be an absolute minimum number of points; • Points should be given for characteristics that the Government wants to attract through this route and for whom other routes are not suitable; • Among the characteristics that the Government might want to consider in assigning points are: Qualifications with a rigorous process to assess the quality of qualifications and not just the level; Age; Extra points for having studied in the UK; Priority areas such as STEM and creative skills - This was called HSMP route a cople of decades ago, do not they remember it ? • Changes should only be made if data is collected on the outcomes of migrants on this route, with monitoring and evaluation of the route. 3. There should be an immediate pause in the proposed increases to the settlement threshold. 4. We recommend a review of the requirements for settlement, to establish a clearer picture of how it is currently working and possible changes that could be made. Salary thresholds in Tier 2 (General) 5. Both the occupation specific and general salary thresholds should be based on the relevant distribution of full-time earnings as reported in the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) and updated annually. The appropriate salary threshold should continue to be the higher of the occupation specific and general threshold. 6. The occupation specific threshold should be the 25th percentile of the full-time annual earnings distribution for that occupation. 7. The general threshold should be set at the 25th percentile of the full-time annual earnings distribution for all Tier 2 (General) eligible occupations. 8. National pay scales should be used as the relevant salary thresholds in 24 occupations in health and education instead of both the occupation specific and general thresholds. 9. If the Government is concerned about the impact of the general threshold on lower-wage medium-skill occupations, we recommend the use of an occupational cap to be set at the 75th percentile. We do not recommend this given the level of the general threshold we propose. 10. There should be more adequate monitoring of how migrants are faring in the UK labour market after entry and ongoing review of the impacts of the recommendations on levels of salary thresholds. 11. The relevant salary thresholds should apply across the UK. 12. There should be a separate pilot visa for ‘remote’ areas of the UK, part of which could be lower salary thresholds for migrants into those areas. This should only be done with a full evaluation to understand its effectiveness and impacts. 13. Salary thresholds should not be pro-rated to allow for part-time work. 14. The Government should consider more flexibility (i.e. prorating salary thresholds) for visa holders switching to part-time work after becoming a parent. 15. Only salary on the main job should be used to determine whether the salary threshold is met. Allowances, equity and employer pension contributions should not be included. 16. The rules on Tier 2 (General) visa holders owning equity in the employer sponsoring them should be reviewed. 17. Occupations on the Shortage Occupation List should not have lower salary thresholds for entry. 18. We recommend a review of whether the SOL is needed after the new immigration system has been fully introduced. 19. National pay scales should be used as the relevant salary thresholds in 24 occupations in health and education instead of both the occupation specific and general thresholds. 20. The salary thresholds for new entrants should be a single ‘reduction’ percentage applied across both the general experienced worker threshold and the occupation specific experienced worker thresholds. 21. The reduction percentage for new entrants should be set at 30 per cent. 22. The definition of a new entrant should be widened to include those are working towards recognised professional qualifications and those who are moving directly into postdoctoral positions. 23. The new entrant rate should apply for five years, an extension from the current three-year entitlement. Any time spent on the new post-study work route should count towards the five years of new entrant threshold eligibility. 24. We recommend adding/removing the following occupations from the list of RQF3+ occupations • Add: Air-conditioning and refrigeration engineers, Rail and rolling stock builders and repairers, Skilled metal, electrical and electronic trades supervisors, Carpenters and joiners, Glaziers, window fabricators and fitters, Plasterers, Floorers and wall tilers, Painters and decorators, Construction and building trades supervisors, Childminders and related occupations, Teaching assistants and Educational support assistants. • Remove: Fishing and other elementary agriculture occupations n.e.c. and Waiters and waitresses. Data issues 25. The Government and ONS should seek to link datasets across government to allow a better understanding of the employment outcomes of migrants, for the purposes of research whilst ensuring confidentiality. 26. The Government should invest in a data set designed to link migrants with subsequent outcomes to be used for the evaluation of all visas. 27. The Home Office should ensure it retains historical data on migration routes in a usable format for future analysis. 28. The Home Office should publish breakdowns of entry clearance visas disaggregated by gender on a regular basis."

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще одна клиентка Legal Centre из Азербайджана легализовалась в Великобритании без выезда (тип заявления - FLR(FP)). Заявление было сложным. Клиентка сначала решила подать заявление не по ускоренному типу (решение за 24 часа), а по стандартному типу (решение в течение 6-и месяцев). После подачи заявления ситуация клиентки изменилась и ей нужно было срочно получить решение раньше. Я подсказал варианты ускорения рассмотрения ее заявление, и заявление рассмотрели буквально на следующей неделе. Работа проходила по принципу общего сопровождения ее заявления: https://legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из Белоруссии стал британским гражданином. Legal Centre помогал ему на всех этапах его иммиграционного пути в Великобританию: - получение супружеской визы - продление супружеской виз - получение ПМЖ (ILR) - получение гражданства Работа проходила по принципу полного сопровождения его заявления / рассмотрение заявления за 24 часа (кроме заявления на гражданство): www.legalcentre.org Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

27 January 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) visa to be re-named in February 2020: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/boost-for-uk-science-with-unlimited-visa-offer-to-worlds-brightest-and-best The Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) visa will be rebranded as the “Global Talent” route from 20 February. The science funding agency UK Research and Innovation will be able to endorse applicants for the rejigged route, according to a government press release, which adds that the system will: "- Provide for a brand new fast-track scheme, managed by UKRI which will enable UK-based research projects that have received recognised prestigious grants and awards, including from the European Space Agency and the Japan Science and Technology Agency, to recruit top global talent, benefitting higher education institutions, research institutes and eligible public sector research establishments. This will enable an individual to be fast-tracked to the visa application stage. - Double the number of eligible fellowships, such as Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, the European Research Council and Human Frontier Science, which also enable individuals to be fast tracked. - Continue to ensure dependents have full access to the labour market. - Preserve the route’s flexibility by not requiring an individual to hold an offer of employment before arriving or tying them to one specific job. - Provide an accelerated path to settlement for all scientists and researchers who are endorsed on the route. - Provide for an exemption from our absences rules for researchers, and their dependants, where they are required overseas for work-related purposes, ensuring they are not penalised when they apply for settlement.". Details will be available on 30 January, when a statement of changes to the Immigration Rules is due. >>> Accountants taking the blame for tax discrepancies should give evidence in person: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/27.html Following another paragraph 322(5) case, where an applicant was refused indefinite leave to remain on the basis of dishonesty for disclosing different income to HMRC as opposed to the Home Office, the Upper Tribunal has issued guidance on evidence from accountants purporting to take the blame for those tax discrepancies. The case of Abbasi (rule 43; para 322(5): accountants’ evidence) [2020] UKUT 27 (IAC) had seemed to be going well for the appellant, Mr Abbasi. Mr Abbasi was initially refused indefinite leave to remain but then won his appeal at the First-tier Tribunal. The tribunal found that Mr Abbasi had acted innocently and had relied on his accountants, who provided a letter claiming to have made a mistake with his tax returns. The First-tier Tribunal placed significant weight on the accountants’ letter. The Home Office appealed to the Upper Tribunal, but it found in Mr Abbasi’s favour once again. That decision was promulgated in July 2019 and Mr Abbasi was granted indefinite leave to remain by the Home Office in October. All’s well that ends well, you might say. But then comes the twist: on 16 September 2019, the Upper Tribunal received an email from the accountant who supposedly wrote the letter in support of Mr Abbasi’s claim, stating that she had never heard of Mr Abbasi or ever assisted him, and she had not written, let alone signed, the letter. The Upper Tribunal then convened a hearing to consider whether it had the power to use rule 43 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 to set aside the decision. It concluded that it did have the power to apply rule 43 of its own motion, where the evidence relied upon by the tribunal in an appeal was forged or otherwise bogus. In practice, though, it could not do so in this case because the appellant had been granted indefinite leave nine days before the Upper Tribunal sent its notice of hearing. The grant of indefinite leave to remain meant that the appeal proceedings had come to an end, and therefore the Upper Tribunal no longer had any jurisdiction. But it is open to the Home Office to revoke Mr Abbasi’s indefinite leave to remain, and I would be surprised if it didn’t. The Upper Tribunal also concluded that accountants who admit to making a mistake with an appellant’s taxes should attend the hearing to give evidence and explain their error. If they do not, the tribunal is unlikely to be able to place any material weight on letters of this kind. This is an example of when one applicant’s fraudulent actions results in making life harder for others. From now on, accountants in these cases are likely to be expected to attend hearings in person to give evidence. Headnote: 1. The Upper Tribunal can apply rule 43 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 of its own motion. 2. The use of fraud before the Upper Tribunal constitutes an abuse of process such as to amount to a “procedural irregularity” for the purposes of rule 43(2)(d). 3. In a case involving a decision under paragraph 322(5) of the immigration rules, where an individual relies upon an accountant’s letter admitting fault in the submission of incorrect tax returns to Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the First-tier or Upper Tribunal is unlikely to place any material weight on that letter if the accountant does not attend the hearing to give evidence, by reference to a Statement of Truth, that explains in detail the circumstances in which the error came to be made; the basis and nature of any compensation; and whether the firm’s insurers and/or any relevant regulatory body have been informed. This is particularly so where the letter is clearly perfunctory in nature.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще одна клиентка Legal Centre из России получила EU Pre-Settled Status. Legal Centre помогал ей на всех этапах ее иммиграционного пути в Великобританию: - получение визы жены гражданина EU - получение EU Pre-Settled Status Работа проходила по принципу полного сопровождения ее заявления: www.legalcentre.org Я помог ей и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

24 January 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> Note on BRP expiry dates of 31/12/2024 (23 January 2020) It has become apparent that Biometric Residence Permits (BRPs) which do not incorporate the next generation of encryption technology are required by the EU to have a validity date of no later than 31 December 2024. Until 1 January of this year, this issue only affected those granted indefinite leave to remain, and some measures were put in place to ensure those who were granted ILR were aware that their leave would remain extant beyond 31 December 2024. As 31 December 2024 is less than five years away, individuals granted limited leave to remain for five years are now receiving BRPs with validity dates earlier than the expiry of their leave. The Home Office's response is as follows: "We are required by the EU to restrict BRPs which do not incorporate the next generation of encryption technology to a validity date of 31 December 2024, subject to the UK leaving the European Union and the outcome of any Brexit negotiations. As the UK intends to introduce the new technology in due course, the date restriction affects only cards issued with Leave valid past the date of 31 December 2024. Any card restricted to 31 December 2024 which is still rightfully held on 01 July 2024 will be replaced free of charge, with the remainder of the leave period initially expected being issued on a new BRP. This means that anyone who has paid a fee in expectation of receiving a period of leave for longer than the 31 December 2024 date, will still do so but it will be spread over two BRPs. The date restriction does not change the entitlements of the rightful holder to work, access services/benefits or travel. Information on how to replace a BRP that is due to expire as a result of this restriction will be updated approximately 6 months prior to 31 December 2024 and applicants affected should consult these web pages at that time for the latest advice" >>> New Knowledge of Life in the UK (KOLL) guidance (23 January 2020): https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjG4_O895vnAhWL8eAKHVDrARUQFjAAegQIBBAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F834967%2FKoLL-v22.0-ext.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0POSRclro-tmXOZQF-qjx9 The guidance has been changed to reflect the changes to the Immigration Rules and Nationality Regulations on 17 December 2019.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из России получил разрешение на переход с Tier 2(General) на Tier 1(Exceptional Talent). Заявление клиента было не простое и процесс подготовки занял примерно 3 месяца. Работа проходила по принципу общего сопровождения его заявления: https://www.legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Приветствую, Существуют два варианта приезда. И не забывайте о Brexit ! Опять же, мало данных, нужно знать все детали, которые можно обсудить здесь.

16 January 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> If something is required by the Immigration Rules, it must be possible, appeal judges declare: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/2293.html Prior to the closure of the Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) route, the main requirement was evidence that an applicant had access to funds for investment in their proposed venture. The Immigration Rules permitted applicants to rely on their own funds, or alternatively on funds that have recently been transferred to them by third parties. In certain circumstances, the rules also permitted reliance on funds that were still held by a third party at the time of the application. In this scenario, the applicant (and the Home Office) was relying on the third party’s promise that, if and when the visa is granted, the funds would be made available to the Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) for their venture. It is still a mystery why the drafters of the Immigration Rules permitted this funding structure at all. If the third party was serious about investing, why not require the funds to be transferred to the prospective Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) prior to the submission of the application? Nothing is impossible Lord Justice Davis, giving judgment in the Court of Appeal, doesn’t really address the bonkers nature of the requirement itself. Instead he sticks to the “rules is rules” theme of applications made under the Points Based System: "The underpinning rationale for the current requirements of the PBS under the Rules is, as I have said, clear. These requirements have been, in a context such as the present, expressly approved as workable and fair in cases such as Durrani and Iqbal (cited above). There is no reason not to apply the reasoning in those cases to paragraph 41-SD(c)(i) of Appendix A and to this particular case, and every reason for doing so. The rules here are specific in their requirements; and the applicant in this case failed to meet those requirements. As paragraph 245DD of the Immigration Rules stipulates, in such circumstances the application will be refused. That, put shortly, is the end of the matter, as I see it." Davis LJ did not accept that such a declaration could not be obtained: "I should in any event make clear that I was wholly unpersuaded on the evidence that there was an impossibility of compliance here. It may be that the evidence (including the two witness statements) indicates that the Halifax Bank itself does not, as a matter of its practice, currently choose to provide letters in the required format. But that does not mean at all that it is impossible for the Halifax Bank to do so. Nor does it preclude an applicant or sponsor from going to some other regulated financial institution which does not have such a practice.".

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из Индии получили ПМЖ (ILR) на основании долгого (Long Residence) проживания в Великобритании. Работа проходила по принципу общего сопровождения его заявления: https://legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из России получил ПМЖ (ILR) по категории Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent). Legal Centre помогал ему на следующих этапах его иммиграционного пути в Великобританию: - получение Tier 1(Exceptional Talent) endorsement - переход с Tier 2 (General) на Tier 1(Exceptional Talent) - получение ПМЖ (ILR) Работа проходила по принципу общего сопровождения его заявления: https://legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

20 January 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> New guidance: False representations – Tier 1 (General) earnings concerns: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiN1ez-_JHnAhVnA2MBHcm4AncQFjAAegQIBBAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F858658%2Ffalse-representations-tier1-_general_-cases-v1.0.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3eQJH5dMWI2Cb13VV1o2_P UKVI has published new supplementary guidance relating to applicants who previously held Tier 1 (General) leave where UKVI have concerns that false representations have been made regarding their earnings. This guidance must be applied in conjunction with the main guidance on False Representations and the guidance on General Grounds for Refusal (GGfR) under Part 9 of the Immigration Rules. This guidance relates to issues decided by the Court of Appeal in Balajigari v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 673.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из Белоруссии стал британским гражданином. Legal Centre помогал ему на всех этапах его иммиграционного пути в Великобританию: - получение статуса беженца - получение проездного документа беженца - получение ПМЖ (ILR) - получение британского гражданства Работа проходила по принципу полного сопровождения его заявления: www.legalcentre.org Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Приветствую, Авиакомпании смотрят в текущий паспорт. Home Office смотрит и туда, и туда. То есть с UK BA обычно проблем не бывает.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще одна клиентка Legal Centre из России получила ПМЖ (ILR - Indefinite Leave to Remain) в Великобритании по категории Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent). Legal Centre помогал ей на всех этапах ее иммиграционного пути в Великобританию. Работа проходила по принципу общего сопровождения ее заявления: https://legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Я помог ей и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org