British Lawyer

Приветствую, Да, я здесь. Жду Вашу запись на консультацию по этой ссылке: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html

12 July 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Tribunal blows hole in mandatory application process for EU law residence documents - Absence of the ex-spouse's EU ID document: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2019/195.html In 2016 the Home Office embarked on an attempt to homogenise the application processes for immigration applications made under EU law and those made under UK law. The Upper Tribunal has confirmed in Rehman (EEA Regulations 2016 – specified evidence) [2019] UKUT 195 (IAC) that there are limits to how prescriptive the Home Office can be when it comes to the former, also known as EEA applications. The decision means that EU citizens or their family members who are turned down for residence documents due to Home Office inflexibility on the exact paperwork required should have a good chance on appeal. In practice, it will still be better to comply with what officials think the law is where possible. The Upper Tribunal’s decision in Rehman Residence card application rejected as invalid In Rehman the Home Office had rejected a residence card application from a Pakistani man who sought to rely on a “retained right of residence” following divorce from his EU citizen spouse. It was accepted that all of the requirements for a retained right of residence were met — but the ex-wife’s passport had not been included. It can be particularly difficult to obtain this in retained right of residence cases as the applicant has, by definition, divorced the person who had effectively been sponsoring them. Sometimes the separation is amicable and the former spouse is happy to help by providing documents. Sometime they are not. As the passport had not been provided with Mr Rehman’s application, the Home Office rejected it with reference to regulation 21. An appeal was lodged and dismissed by the First-tier Tribunal. Mr Rehman appealed to the Upper Tribunal. Insistence on particular documents not allowed by EU law The Upper Tribunal began by recognising that EU law does allow administrative procedures to be put in place to ensure consistency. But: …the “supporting documents required” cannot go beyond the requirements of the Directive or what is strictly necessary to establish the relevant right of residence under European Union law… provisions introduced for administrative convenience must not go beyond what is required to establish a right of residence. In Mr Rehman’s case, this is what had happened. The Home Office had accepted that the requirements for a retained right of residence had been met. The only reason they rejected the application was due to a failure to provide a particular document (the passport). Requiring this document went beyond what was needed to establish a right of residence. It is not required by EU law, which takes priority over the 2016 Regulations: The provisions contained in regulations 21 and 42 must be interpreted to conform with European Union law. If the provision does not conform with European Union law on the facts of a case, it must be read to conform. In some cases, this might involve ignoring the requirement for specified evidence altogether if a document is not in fact required to establish a right of residence. As such, Mr Rehman’s appeal was allowed. He met the requirements and it did not matter that he had not provided his former partner’s passport. This will not necessarily apply in every case. It was the blanket nature of the rule which the Upper Tribunal objected to. Sometimes there could be justification for requiring submission of the EEA national’s passport. For instance the Tribunal recognises that: If there was any doubt that the appellant had been married to an EEA national as claimed the respondent could lawfully require the production of his former wife’s passport, but this was not an issue in this case. The respondent accepted that the appellant was married to an EEA national when he issued the previous residence card. Indeed, the respondent accepted that the appellant met the requirements of regulation 10(5). So it seems we are back to the pre-2016 Regulations position of preferring substance over form, at least in theory. What does this mean in practice? So should the applicants all start disregarding the Home Office’s EEA application procedures, ignoring the forms and the mandatory specified documents? No. In practice it will be much easier to comply. Notwithstanding the decision in Rehman, the Home Office is likely to carry on as if nothing has changed. It is much easier to implement a strict box-ticking exercise which can be carried out by administrative staff at an early stage of the application process, rather than engage in an overall assessment of the case before deciding whether to accept an application as valid. If an application is rejected solely because a particular document is missing, it is likely that an appeal would be successful providing that the requirements for a residence card can be met. The decision in Rehman therefore provides a fall back for anyone who is not able to provide the documents required under the EEA Regulations. However for the majority of applicants it will be quicker and easier to avoid the need for an appeal to the tribunal by following the Home Office’s preferred application process and providing the documents requested by the Regulations, forms, and guidance. The official headnote The principles outlined in Barnett and Others (EEA Regulations; rights and documentation) [2012] UKUT 00142 are equally applicable to The Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016. Section 1 of Schedule 1 to these regulations provides that the sole ground of appeal is that the decision breaches the appellant’s rights under the EU Treaties in respect of entry to or residence in the United Kingdom. The provisions contained in regulations 21 and 42 must be interpreted in the light of European Union law. In some cases, this might involve ignoring the requirement for specified evidence altogether if a document is not in fact required to establish a right of residence. >>> UKVI Guidance: Applying for a UK visa: approved English language tests: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-on-applying-for-uk-visa-approved-english-language-tests?utm_source=6e122125-72b3-4887-aaed-8ff2022c01cc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate List of tests and test centres approved by UK Visas and Immigration to show that applicants have the required level of English for their visa. Updated list of approved tests and providers for July 2019.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre Вот и очередная клиентка из США получила ILR - Settlement. Я помог этой клиентке приехать в Великобританию, продлить ее визу и теперь – получить ПМЖ.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre Вот и очередная клиентка из России получила ПМЖ/ILR - Indefinite Leave to Remain по довольно редкой категории Discretionary Leave (DL). Клиентка обратилась к нам после того, как ее перестал удовлетворять уровень сервиса, предоставляемый ее бывшими "адвокатами". Клиентка первоначально проконсультировалась со мной используя принцип "альтернативного мнения": https://legalcentre.org/Alternativnoe-mnenie-v-immigratii.html После перехода в Legal Cenre несколько лет тому назад я помог клиентке продлить ее Discretionary Leave и теперь – получить ПМЖ. Вы можете записаться на 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

10 June 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Stop denying citizenship to British-born kids, government told: https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news-parliament-2017/british-nationality-act-1981-remedial-order-2-report-published-17-19/ Parliament’s human rights committee has hit out at the controversial “good character” test in child citizenship applications, saying that it is “inappropriate” to disqualify British-born youngsters from citizenship because of petty misdemeanors. In a report published today, the Joint Committee on Human Rights says that “an unduly heavy-handed approach to the good character requirement is depriving children who have lived in the UK all of their lives from their right to British citizenship”. The committee was ostensibly reviewing a draft government Order to amend the British Nationality Act 1981 to eliminate historic gender discrimination. It concluded that the Order would address human rights problems identified in the Supreme Court cases of Johnson and Bangs, and recommended that it be approved by Parliament. But the committee also went off-piste with a look at wider problems in nationality law, taking particular exception to the good character requirement being applied to children registering for British citizenship.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre Сегодня клиент из Молдовы получил подтверждение о его легализации в Великобритании. Теперь этот клиент может жить со своей семьей и работать в Великобритании. Все начинается здесь, во время простой, конфиденциальной online консультации со мной, на которую Вы можете записаться 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 Вот и очередная клиентка из России получила ПМЖ (ILR) по категории Discretionary Leave (DL). Я помог этой клиентке продлить ее визу и теперь – получить ПМЖ. Все начинается здесь, во время простой, конфиденциальной online консультации со мной, на которую Вы можете записаться 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)3300010342

Приветствую, 1. Да 2. Нет - при соблюдении ряда условий. Зависит от типа подачи. Например, когда оригиналы документов не отсылаются в Home Office.

Да, будет действителен.

08 June 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Why some employers are not abe to check the migrant's right to work in the UK : https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/right-to-work-checks-employers-guide ? An employer’s guide to right to work checks: 28 January 2019 "Outstanding applications, appeals and administrative reviews If you request verification from the Employer Checking Service because the employee or potential employee has an outstanding application with us or appeal or administrative review against a Home Office decision, you should wait at least 14 days after the application, appeal or administrative review has been delivered or posted to us or the court, before requesting a verification check. This is because it takes this amount of time for most applications, appeals or administrative reviews to be registered with the Home Office. In order to make the verification request with the Employer Checking Service, you must obtain confirmation from your employee or potential employee of when the application, appeal or administrative review was made to the Home Office. This information must be included in the request form. The Employer Checking Service aims to provide a response within 5 working days of receiving a valid request. It is your responsibility to inform the person you intend to employ, or continue employing, that you are carrying out this check on them, to complete the verification request correctly and to make the request at least 14 days after the date of the application, appeal or administrative review was delivered or posted." >>> UKVI Guidance: Employer sponsorship: restricted certificate allocations: http://www.ilpa.org.uk/resource/35584/ukvi-guidance-employer-sponsorship-restricted-certificate-allocations-8-july-2019 A list of restricted certificates allocated each month for employer sponsorship in Tier 2 (General). Added figures for April, May and June 2019. >>> UKVI Guidance: Returns preparation: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/returns-preparation?utm_source=39dd774b-2f1f-458e-896d-b52886cc1d85&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate Guidance on arranging removals for officers dealing with immigration enforcement matters within the UK. Guidance on ‘suspension of enforced removal window’ updated.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости моим клиентам (C) Сегодня очередной клиент из Украины получил гражданство Великобритании. Я помогал этому клиентку приехать в Великобританию, получить продление визы, ПМЖ и вот теперь он стал британским гражданином. Рассмотрения заявления заняло всего 3 недели:

+1........

Приветствую, Итак: - Оплата - Регистрация на сайте SS (!) - Выбор места сдачи биометрики - Загрузка документов "Бесплатные" слоты - сейчкс через недель 5 только есть. Платные (+£60-£520) - хоть на следующий день. Внутренний паспорт - нужен только номер, в принципе. Хотя я так же загружаю так же и копию разворота без перевода. Дата подачи = дата оплаты. Т.е. дата биометрики может быть после даты окончания BRP. Хотя я так не рекомендую делать особенно если заявление подается по Super Premium Service.

Пожалуйста. Рад был помочь Вам

Приветствую, Уровень для заявления на натурализацию - B1 CEFR. См. здесь: https://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=3220