British Lawyer

23 October 2018 – 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 >>> UKVI Guidance: EU Settlement Scheme: evidence of UK residence: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/guidance/eu-settlement-s...ntent=immediate</noindex> How to provide evidence that you’ve been living here if we can’t confirm this through an automated check of UK tax and benefits records. >>> UKVI Guidance: Correcting an incorrect endorsement: ECB19: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ntent=immediate</noindex> Information and guidance on handling visa applications made outside the UK. Added information about the time limit for raising errors. Removed information about the address to send passports to, the information is no longer valid.

Тут я однозначно рекомендую Игоря - он помог большому числу моих клиентов с Украины, кому нужен был развод на Украине.

Рад был помочь Вам :-)

Приветствую, Вопрос касается какой конкретно секции и какой анкеты ?

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre. Сегодня, в понедельник, почтальон Royal Mail ипринес хорошие новости нашей клиентке и ее сыну из Румынии. Клиенты получили положительно решение и регистрационные сертификаты UK BA.

22 October 2018 – 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 >>> Wanted: 40 immigration judges, salary £100,000+ The link: <noindex>https://www.judicialappointments.gov.uk/vacancies/109</noindex> The Judicial Appointments Commission is advertising for 41 new salaried judges to fill vacancies in the immigration and asylum chamber of the First-tier Tribunal. The salary is an attractive £108,171 (slightly more in London). The scale of this recruitment drive is unprecedented in recent times. The last set of salaried appointments in January 2018 saw 11 judges appointed, with a handful more confirmed the following month. These piecemeal additions have obviously been insufficient to address a growing shortage. In 2005 there were 152 salaried judges sitting in the tribunal’s immigration and asylum chamber, according to its President, Michael Clements. By last year, that was down to just 57. A report by Justice earlier this year found that “morale among First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) judges is not as it should be”. >>> Home Office CAN speak to your persecutor without asking you: <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2018/337.html</noindex> So says the Upper Tribunal in PA (Protection claim, Respondent’s enquiries, Bias) [2018] UKUT 337 (IAC); at least if your confidentiality is preserved. Officials checked Bangladeshi police records for evidence of persecution PA, a Bangladeshi national, claimed asylum in April 2016 on the basis that he was an active member of the Bangladesh National Party. He had entered the UK in 2012 and was placed on reporting conditions in January 2013; the reason for the late asylum claim is not explained. In support of his claim the appellant had provided First Information Reports (FIRs) and charge sheets, issued by the police in Sylhet at the behest of his political opponents. With a zeal that is not seen in countries where false documents are not so readily available, the Home Office conducted a document verification exercise and produced a report. A member of staff from the British High Commission visited the police station and asked to verify the FIRs and the charge sheets. In a move that seems strange to us in the age of GPDR, the officer in charge looked in the register and after not locating the documents relating to PA happily allowed the High Commission official to have a look through the records himself. The official could not locate the original documents either. The Home Office unsurprisingly found the documents to be false and refused the applicant’s claim for asylum. The First-tier Tribunal agreed. The Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal on three grounds. It may be worth reading the whole determinate to appreciate the scope of the Home Office’s “zeal” in certain cases. The official headnote: 1. Respondent’s inquiries in country of origin of applicant for international protection (1) There is no general legal requirement on the Secretary of State to obtain the consent of an applicant for international protection before making an inquiry about the applicant in the applicant’s country of origin. The decision in VT (Article 22 Procedures Directive – confidentiality) Sri Lanka [2017] UKUT 368 (IAC) is not to be read as holding to the contrary. (2) The United Kingdom’s actual legal obligations in this area are contained in Article 22 of the Procedures Directive (2005/85/EC), as given effect in paragraph 339IA of the Immigration Rules. So far as obtaining information is concerned, these provisions prohibit making such an inquiry in a manner that would result in alleged actors of persecution being directly informed of the fact that that an application for international protection has been made, which would jeopardise the applicant’s (or his family’s) physical integrity, liberty or security. (3) If information is obtained in a way that has such an effect, the fact that the applicant may have given consent will not affect the fact that there is a breach of Article 22. 2. Allegations of judicial bias (1) An allegation of bias against a judge is a serious matter and the appellate court or tribunal will expect all proper steps to be taken by the person making it, in the light of a response from the judge. (2) The views of an appellant who cannot speak English and who has had no prior experience of an appeal hearing are unlikely to be of assistance, insofar as they concern verbal exchanges between the judge and representatives at the hearing of the appeal. In particular, the fact that the judge had more questions for the appellant’s counsel than for the respondent’s presenting officer has no bearing on whether the judge was biased against the appellant. (3) It is wholly inappropriate for an official interpreter to have his or her private conversations with an appellant put forward as evidence. (4) As a general matter, if Counsel concludes during a hearing that a judge is behaving in an inappropriate manner, Counsel has a duty to raise this with the judge. (5) Although each case will turn on its own facts, an appellate court or tribunal may have regard to the fact that a complaint of this kind was not made at the hearing or, at least, before receipt of the judge’s decision. (6) Allegations relating to what occurred at a hearing would be resolved far more easily if hearings in the First-tier Tribunal were officially recorded.

Пожалуйста. Был рад Вам помочь.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre И эта суббота не была исключением. Сегодня почтальон Royal Mail и курьер DX принесли хорошие новости нашей клиентке из Грузии. Клиентка получила положительно решение и 5-и летнюю BRP карточку.

Еще раз прочитал Ваш предыдущий ответ: "Или я путаю грешное с праведным и это касается только изменений в самой форме, а не в формате подачи? Ещё раз спасибо!" - именно так.

Приветствую, Appointments взяты и оплачены за 45 дней. Форма бумажные заполнены. Подаю бумажные формы. Я до последнего, наверное, буду использовать бумажные формы, т.к. с ними больше гибкости. Сейчас по категориями FLR, SET и т.п. можно подавать или Online или бумажную форму. Обычно когда происходят "глобальные" изменения, UK BA предоставляет переходный период. Пока все остается как есть.

Приветствую, По законадательству UA ответил Игорь, по UK - так же не вижу проблем.

Приветствую, По некоторым категориям, например, Tier 2 и Tier 4, уже как несколько лет только online. То есть, бумажной формы нет вообще :-) В личном визите по категории T2 или T4, как пример, я заполняю анкету клиента, подаю ее, бронирую same day service appointment, оплачиваю NHS Surcharge и UK BA fee. Потом распечатываю поданную форму, check list и biometric enrollment sheet. Пока еще не ноябрь 2018, и по новым правилам никто еще не подавал ни одного заявления, разумеется.

Слоты есть, не всегда, правда. На данном этапе - желаю Вам удачной подачи.

20 October 2018 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and up-dates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Is completion of a 10 year lawful residence route possible with a visitor visa ? Technically, yes, that is possible. However, visitors applying for ILR or another category may be refused under 322(7) because of V 4.2 (a) & ©, unless there was a strong change of circumstances. >>> UK Students – what work you CAN NOT do: <noindex>https://www.ukcisa.org.uk/Information--Advi...work-can-you-do</noindex> and the in-depth information here, too: <noindex>https://www.ukcisa.org.uk/blog/6257/A-working-definition</noindex> >>> Court of Appeal says statelessness must be proved on balance of probabilities: <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/2234.html</noindex> In AS (Guinea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 2234, the Court of Appeal has in effect rebuffed an attempt by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to make it easier to establish statelessness. The court ruled that the standard of proof for determining a statelessness application is the normal civil standard, i.e. the balance of probabilities. The appellant had argued that the “real risk” standard of proof, which is used for determining refugee status, should be applied. That lower standard is recommended by the UNHCR in a 2014 handbook on how to apply the 1954 Statelessness Convention. Instead, the Court of Appeal chose to follow a line of domestic authority supporting the use of the ordinary civil standard and noted that, of the states which are party to the Convention, only six use a standard of proof below the balance of probabilities. >>> High Court upholds Home Secretary’s decision to cancel passports of British citizens: <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/2651.html</noindex> An important decision by the UK High Court that demonstrates that possession of a British passport is precarious. Having a passport is a privilege, not a right, and the Home Secretary can exercise his power under the royal prerogative to cancel a passport if he thinks it is in the public interest. >>> UKVI form triple update: Application for a replacement biometric residence permit: BRP(RC); Application to transfer indefinite leave to remain in UK: NTL; Application to transfer visa to biometric residence permit: TOC The forms have been now updated.

18 October 2018 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and up-dates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Tribunal President says bus drivers and brain surgeons to be treated the same: <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2018/336.html</noindex> Thakrar (Cart JR; Art 8: value to community) [2018] UKUT 336 (IAC) is a rare example of a case where permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal was only granted by a High Court judge after a Cart judicial review of the Upper Tribunal. To put it another way, the Upper Tribunal did not think there was merit in the case but was forced to hear it anyway by a High Court judge. The head-note: (1) The fact that an application for permission to appeal involves the assertion that a per-son’s removal from the United Kingdom would violate his or her human rights does not, without more, engage that part of the second appeal criteria, which allows permission to appeal (or permission for a ‘Cart’ judicial review) to be granted, on the basis that removal constitutes a ‘compelling reason’ for the appeal to be heard. If the position were otherwise, the second appeal criteria would lose their function as a restriction on the power to grant per-mission to appeal in immigration cases. (2) Before concluding that submissions regarding the positive contribution made by an individual fall to be taken into account, for the purposes of Article 8(2) of the ECHR, as diminishing the importance to be given to immigration controls, a judge must be satisfied that the contribution is very significant. In practice, this is likely to arise only where the matter is one over which there can be no real disagreement. One touchstone for determining this is to ask whether the removal of the person concerned would lead to an irreplaceable loss to the community of the United Kingdom or to a significant element of it. (3) The fact that a person makes a substantial contribution to the United Kingdom economy cannot, without more, constitute a factor that diminishes the importance to be given to immigration controls, when determining the Article 8 position of that person or a member of his or her family. (4) If judicial restraint is not properly maintained in this area, there is a danger that the public’s perception of human rights law will be significantly damaged.”

Привилегия Адвоката Всегда приятно получить по E-mail подтверждение из UK BA о том, что заявление клиента рассмотрено положительно и что сегодня специальный курьер UK BA (the DX) доставит новую BRP карточку клиента в офис Legal Centre а несколько дней до того, как почтальон Royal Mail принесет большой пакет из UK BA с остальными документами клиента. Вот как выглядит E-mail из UK BA, подтверждающий что заявление клиента рассмотрено положительно и что сегодня курьер DX доставит в наши офис новую BRP карточку клиента: Nice one ©

Пожалуйста, Рад был помочь.

Приветствую еще раз. Был рад помочь Вам тогда. Наша фирма Legal Centre теперь работаем без выходных. В выходные я провожу консультации до 13.00. Ссылка для записи на консультацию со мной так же: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> Буду рад помочь Вам снова.

17 October 2018 – Just useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> UKVI forms: Application to transfer UK visa to new passport: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ntent=immediate</noindex> The form to apply to transfer a visa to a new passport if you have not travelled to the UK yet has been updated. >> Upper Tribunal tackles the law on the parent/child relationship: <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2018/334.html</noindex> In SR (subsisting parental relationship – s117B(6)) Pakistan 2018 UKUT 3345 (IAC), the Upper Tribunal examines the various pieces of law relevant to deciding whether someone who has a child in the UK should be allowed to stay here. The case is helpful for two reasons: 1. The Home Office’s approach to section 117B(6) in its new guidance, published in February 2018 and discussed on this blog by Nath shortly afterwards, is firmly rejected 2. The tribunal provides a useful summary of the law on evaluating the parent/child relationship The official headnote: 1. If a parent (‘P’) is unable to demonstrate he / she has been taking an active role in a child’s upbringing for the purposes of E-LTRPT.2.4 of the Immigration Rules, P may still be able to demonstrate a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with a qualifying child for the purposes of section 117B(6) of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’). The determination of both matters turns on the particular facts of the case. 2. The question of whether it would not be reasonable to expect a child to leave the United Kingdom (‘UK’) in section 117B(6) of the 2002 Act does not necessarily require a consideration of whether the child will in fact or practice leave the UK. Rather, it poses a straightforward question: would it be reasonable “to expect” the child to leave the UK? >>> New asylum policy on non-Dublin third country cases: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...d-country-cases</noindex> The Home Office has published a new policy document entitled Inadmissibility: EU grants of asylum, first country of asylum and safe third country concepts, all about non-Dublin third country cases. It covers Immigration Rules 345A-D on asylum claims where the claimant has: 1. Already been granted protection in another EU country (rule 345A) 2. Already been granted protection in a non-EU country which is considered safe (rule 345B) 3. A “sufficient degree of connection” to a non-EU safe country to be removed there (rule 345C and 345D) There are few if any such cases really, so the time spent writing the policy was no doubt time “well” spent. >>> Tribunal to make its own decisions on trafficking cases: <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2018/335.html</noindex> In ES (s82 NIA 2002, Negative NRM) [2018] UKUT 335 (IAC) a victim of trafficking from Albania had been assessed by the Home Office not to be a victim of trafficking under the National Referral Mechanism. Previous cases have held that the tribunal is effectively fixed with the NRM trafficking decision. Not so, finds Judge Nadine Finch. Not only does Judge Finch distinguish earlier Court of Appeal authority but she also disagrees with the earlier determination of Judge Gill in AUJ (Trafficking – no conclusive grounds decision) Bangladesh [2018] UKUT 200 (IAC), commenting that the relevant finding was obiter and not part of the official headnote. The official headnote to ES: 1. Following the amendment to s 82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’), effective from 20 October 2014, a previous decision made by the Competent Authority within the National Referral Mechanism (made on the balance of probabilities) is not of primary relevance to the determination of an asylum appeal, despite the decisions of the Court of Appeal in AS (Afghanistan) v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 1469 and SSHD v MS (Pakistan) [2018] EWCA Civ 594. 2. The correct approach to determining whether a person claiming to be a victim of trafficking is entitled to asylum is to consider all the evidence in the round as at the date of hearing, applying the lower standard of proof. 3. Since 20 October 2014, there is also no right of appeal on the basis that a decision is not in accordance with the law and the grounds of appeal are limited to those set out in the amended s 82 of the 2002 Act. Also, some interesting discussion in the determination of assessing vulnerability of a witness and then how to deal with that witness’s evidence. Good to see a realistic and humane approach being adopted by the UK BA Presenting Officer.

16 October 2018 – Just useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> A successful Judicial Review may, unfortunately, break down the continued residence This is because a judicial review does not extend the leave under the Section 3C. The UK BA may, therefore, consider the applicant’s continuous lawful residence under Long Residence as broken. >>> Losing a Tier 2 sponsorship while applying for ILR If one applies for ILR on the basis of competing a 5 year employment period and then the current employer withdraws/loses the Certificate of Sponsorship, any new employer of that Tier 2 migrant will need to apply for a new certificate of sponsorship on the basis of para 14 of the court of appeal judgement in QI ( PAKISTAN ): <noindex>https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/614.html</noindex>

Приветствую. Отличные новости. По подписи. Паспорта обычно всегда подписываются в UK.

Приветствую, Все заявления на ПМЖ и EEA Family Permit рассматрвиаются в Шеффилде уже пару лет как. Просто на Украине документы сканируют, в России - посылают в Шеффилд оригиналы. Что-то долго у Вас. На прошлой неделе клиентка (обратилась после отказа после помощи "агенства" с Украины) получила визу жены за 89 дней.

Приветствую. Оба оригинала нудно посылать.

Приветству, Если Вы имеете в виду завление на ПМЖ, т.е. Вы замужем за британцем на виже жены, уже привезли 1 ребенка и сейчас хотите забрать 2-го ребенка (до 18 лет !), то доход должен быть £24 800. Доход обоих может учитываться. Заяление дочери 17 лет нужно подать ДО ее 18-и летия. Дальше, даже если ей исполнится 18 лет на момент рассмотрения, она успевает приехать (при условии, что ее заяление будет одобрено UK VAC).

Приветствую, Отличные новости. Любая копия Land Registry подойдет.