British Lawyer

15 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> UK Visit visa refused ? Possible ways forward explained Re-apply If it works, the simplest way to deal with a visa refusal is to re-apply, submitting a new application form with new evidence and a new fee. But is it likely to work or is it a waste of time and money? If the application was refused because insufficient evidence was submitted, for example bank statements or similar, then this should be quite easy to correct. It is far from unknown for a visa official simply to ignore or overlook evidence that was actually submitted, though. Where this happens it is unfair to have to pay another fee and a letter to the Entry Clearance Manager asking for reconsideration is worth considering. There are some circumstances where it is clear that reconsideration or re-application is not likely to be available and a legal challenge will be needed instead. For example: • If the previous refusal states that the applicant has been excluded from the UK for a certain period of time, for example for use of deception. If there was some sort of simple and obvious misunderstanding or mistake it may be possible to remedy this by a reconsideration request or new application but in most cases a legal challenge will be needed. • Where the evidence relied on was rejected as being from an inadequate or unverifiable source. There is little point re-submitting the same documents a second time. • Where the reason stated by the visa officer is that the applicant is not a genuine visitor or does not have an intention to return. There are usually no extra documents that can be submitted to prove one’s case once these subjective intention issues arise. Some visa application posts are more reasonable and make better quality decisions than others. Quality of decisions in Islamabad is very poor, for example, whereas New York is far better. A reapplication or reconsideration request is well worth considering at the latter post because someone might actually engage with the issues rather than merely mindlessly re-refusing. If reconsideration or re-application are not likely to work or have been tried and failed, it is time to consider legal action. Right of appeal As of July 2013 it is only possible to appeal to the immigration tribunal against refusal of a visit visa where the grounds of appeal are on human rights grounds. Whether or not the visit engages human rights considerations therefore determines whether there is a right of appeal. The problem is that a person may attempt to appeal on human rights grounds but, many months later and after having paid appeal fees and legal costs, a judge may decide the visit does not really raise human rights grounds and therefore there was no right of appeal in the first place. A lot of time, energy and money will have been wasted bringing the appeal, and the chance lost to challenge the refusal by other means such as an application for judicial review. To say this is unsatisfactory is an understatement. Case of Mostafa In the case of Mostafa (Article 8 in entry clearance) [2015] UKUT 112 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal considered this question of when human rights might be engaged in a visit visa case. The tribunal held that where a couple are married human rights are certainly engaged but expressed some scepticism whether human rights might be engaged in other, wider circumstances. The determination is considered further below. Only family life relationships were considered, by the tribunal, though, not private life, and the tribunal also omitted to consider whether a different standard for engagement of human rights was relevant for a temporary visit as opposed to a settlement application. After all, in AG (Eritrea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] EWCA Civ 801 the Court of Appeal in a unified judgment looked at Costello-Roberts v United Kingdom (1993) 19 EHRR 112 then held: “It follows, in our judgment, that while an interference with private or family life must be real if it is to engage art. 8(1), the threshold of engagement (the “minimum level”) is not a specially high one. Once the article is engaged, the focus moves, as Lord Bingham’s remaining questions indicate, to the process of justification under art. 8(2). It is this which, in all cases which engage article 8(1), will determine whether there has been a breach of the article.” Lastly, the appellant in Mostafa was unrepresented, meaning that no legal argument was presented on these issues and no onward appeal was realistically feasible. What sorts of visits might pass the test? It might be thought that visits between close family members, particularly visits intended to maintain a relationship, would engage human rights protection at some level: without face to face visits, any relationship is surely doomed over time. For example, a visit from one spouse to another, particularly if separated by the harsh family settlement rules, would on the face of it engage Article 8. A visit of a young child to the UK to see a parent or a parent to see a young child would also appear to engage human rights protection at some level. The same might be said of a visit of an elderly relative to see his or her children and family in the UK where settlement is not an option because of the Catch-22 nature of the new dependent relative rules. Some other types of relationship may also reach the relevant threshold, yet it may be challenging to arrange the suitable documentary evidence. >>> How does the UK BA assess the validity of a marriage ? 14. SET3.14 Assessment of validity of marriage: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ity-of-marriage</noindex> ` The ECO must be satisfied that the parties are validly married to each other. Most applications will normally be made in the country where the marriage took place.Enquiries about the marriage laws of other countries should be referred to family operations policy. The recognition under the law of England or Wales, or Scotland, or Northern Ireland, of any marriage which took place outside the UK is governed by the following three questions: • Is the type of marriage one recognised in the country in which it took place? • Was the actual marriage properly executed so as to satisfy the requirements of the law of the country in which it took place? • Was there anything in the law of either party’s country of domicile that restricted his / her freedom to enter the marriage? Domicile is a very important concept in English law. It is the place which a person regards as his permanent home and with which he has the closest ties. It contains a dual element of: 1. actual residence in a place; and 2. an intention of remaining there permanently For more guidance on domicile see SET15 Domicile. Where one of the parties to a marriage abroad was domiciled in England and Wales at the time of the marriage, and there was a lawful impediment in English law (that is, he / she was under the age of 16; the parties were not respectively male and female; he / she was already lawfully married or a civil partner; the parties were related within the prohibited degrees), the marriage could not be recognised in England and Wales. The same considerations apply in relation to domicile and law in Scotland, and, separately, in Northern Ireland. If the answers to the above questions are respectively ‘yes’, ‘yes’ and ‘no’ then the marriage will be treated as a marriage for the purpose of the ‘spouse’ paragraphs of the Rules, whether or not it is polygamous (but see separate guidance on dealing with applications from polygamous partners SET14 Polygamous marriages. Where ECOs have material doubts over the recognition of the marriage in the country in which it took place, and / or over its having been properly executed so as to satisfy the requirements of the law of the country in which it took place, the onus is on the applicant to show that those doubts are misplaced. >>> Application for UK visa to visit or for short-term stay: form VAF1A: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ntent=immediate</noindex> Form to apply to visit or transit through the UK, for short-term study and parents visiting their child on a Tier 4 (child) visa.

Приветствую, Простым языком : 1) Если выполнили все условия на ПМЖ, т.е. жили вместе минимум 5 лет, и Вы работали без перерыва 5 лет - подавайте на ПМЖ 2) Если не выполнили условия на ПМЖ (перерыв вработе, например), то подавайте на продление.

Имеют право, т.к. они все-таки предложили Вам fixed term, который Вы приняли.

Приветствую, Простым языком : 1) Если выполнили все условия на ПМЖ, т.е. жили вместе минимум 5 лет, и Вы работали без перерыва 5 лет - подавайте на ПМЖ 2) Если не выполнили условия на ПМЖ (перерыв вработе, например), то подавайте на продление.

Приветствую, Первоисточник, много текста : <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rul...v-visitor-rules</noindex> По русски, четко и по делу : <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex>

14 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> UK Visas and Immigration Guidance: Endorsing bodies: Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ntent=immediate</noindex> List of authorised institutions for Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur). Updated to remove the University of Bedfordshire.

У Вас очень детальные вопросы, на которые я могу ответить здесь: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex>

Отлично. Рад был помочь. А вот ссылка: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...us-period-in-uk</noindex>

13 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> The 6 items of correspondence “Rules” for the FLR(M), SET(M) etc applications may I unlawful, the UTT says: <noindex>https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2016-ukut-25</noindex> The requirement for the couple to have 6 items of (joint) correspondence addressed to them was proved unlawful by the UTT. That said, the application forms still list this requirement and it is best to comply with the requirements rather than taking a risk of a possible refusal. Put it simply – the UK BA caseworkers are simple clerks and they are not suppose to know (and they often do not) the in-depth case-law. >>> When does an EEA national can apply for Permanent Residence without showing the evidence of economic activity ? This may be possible when, say, an EEA national wife has been a worker for a period of 5 years. Then the EEA national husband can simply joint the EEA wife’s PR application as a qualified family member. >>> Permanent Residence BRP card issued for the period under 10 years (usually up to the 31st December 2024) ? Here is why: From the UK BA, the response: “Thank you for your enquiry regarding the expiry date on your Biometric Residence Permit (BRP). To explain, 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. As the UK intends to introduce the new technology in due course, the date restriction affects only cards issued to adults with settled status, as no other BRPs that we issue would still be valid on that date. 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 10 year period initially expected being issued on a new BRP. This means that anyone who has paid a fee in expectation of receiving ten year evidence of settled status 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. The rightful holder still has settled status. A date restricted card replaced as a result of a charged application made after the UK introduction of the new encryption technology will be valid to a date 10 years from issue of the initial card. (This typically applies to requests to replace a lost or stolen card, and requests to reflect a lawful change of name, gender or nationality.) The exact process for providing replacement BRPs to applicants in this position has yet to be determined. Therefore we recommend that applicants study the guidance made available by the Government prior to the expiry of their BRP to establish the steps needed to undertake in replacing their permit. We hope this clarifies the current situation and thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Kind Regards BRP Error Team”

На этой неделе, практически. Как всегда, раз-два в неделю я подаю заявления форумчан и не только на продление их виз, переход с одного иммиграционного статуса в другой, получения ПМЖ, замены документов, перенос виз и т.п. В этот раз я подавал завления FLR(FP) и FLR(M). - FLR(FP) - продление виз клиентов после легализации через рождение ребенка в Великобритании - FLR(M) - переход со студенческой визы Tier 4 на визу жены британца - FLR(M) - второе продление визы жены британца FLR(FP) рассматривали часа 4 - все-таки это довольно сложное заявление, даже не смотря на то, что я подаю подобные заявление в нашем местном PSC уже 15+ лет FLRM же как всегда рассмотрели быстро - за 2 часа, хотя в одном из FLRM был довольно сложный финансовый момент.

Приветствую, Все в порядке, проходите, т.к.у Вас не было отсутствий больше чем 180 дней в любом из этих 5 лет. Могу все детально проверить здесь, как другим форумчанам : <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/proverka-zayavleniy.html</noindex>

10 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Extending a visitor visa while in the UK ? In certain cases it may be possible to extend one’s visitor visa while in the UK due to certain compelling circumstances. Say, if the couple was visiting the UK and one of the spouses was diagnosed with a serious medical condition. It may then be possible to extend a visitor visa in-country for the purpose of the private medical treatment via the form FLR(IR). In certain other cases it may also be possible to extend one's visitor visa. I have done it in the past for number of clients. >>> Home Office concedes that Irish citizens are settled in the UK The Home Office has confirmed that Irish citizens living in the UK are considered “settled” for the purposes of immigration law. The department said that officials in individual cases who had denied that Irish citizens were settled as soon as they took up residence in the UK were wrong to do so, and that it had send out guidance to ensure that decision-makers are aware of the correct position. Irish nationals are treated differently in UK immigration law to any other nationality, as the Common Travel Area joins the UK and Republic of Ireland in a free movement zone independently of the European Union. This special status includes an Irish citizen being considered “settled” — having legal permission to live in the UK permanently unless deported for a criminal offence — as soon as they take up ordinary residence here. >>> How is the government using its increased powers to strip British people of their citizenship? The recent judgment in Aziz & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1884 saw the Court of Appeal uphold the Home Secretary’s decision to use her power to strip members of a notorious Rochdale grooming gang of their British citizenship. The use of a power once reserved for national security cases to impose additional punishment upon serious criminals is new. The legal constraints on this power have been significantly loosened over the years, and the Rochdale case shows that the Home Office is prepared to exercise it in circumstances other than those touching on national security, as has traditionally been the case. This would, if the start of a trend, be cause for concern — or at least some public debate. >>> UK Visas and Immigration Guidance: EEA nationals qualified persons (09 August 2018): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ntent=immediate</noindex> Guidance on European Economic Area (EEA) national qualified persons. >>> UK Visas and Immigration Form: Application for certificate showing right of abode (09 August 2018): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ntent=immediate</noindex> Form ROA to apply for a certificate of entitlement proving you have the right to live and work in the UK.

Отличные новости. Муж Ваш - молодец.

09 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Extending a visitor visa while in the UK ? In certain cases it may be possible to extend one’s visitor visa while in the UK due to certain compelling circumstances. Say, if the couple was visiting the UK and one of the spouses was diagnosed with a serious medical condition. It may then be possible to extend a visitor visa in-country for the purpose of the private medical treatment via the firm FLR(IR). In certain other cases it may also be possible to extend one's visitor visa. I have done it in the past for number of clients.

Приветствую, Похоже, не ту категорию где-то выбираете.

08 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> An online immigration application is of course valid, Court of Appeal says: <noindex>http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/1669.html</noindex> R (Singh) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1669 is about how the transitional provisions in the Immigration Rules apply to online applications which must be supported with further evidence sent later by post. The appellant argued that an application made online without supporting evidence was not valid and therefore did not count as an application for the purpose of deciding whether the “old” or “new” Rules applied. The Court of Appeal rejected this argument and ruled that the online application did count and therefore the previous Rules would apply. This meant the appellant could not benefit from a change to the Rules which required the Home Office to chase applicants for missing evidence and give them an additional 10 days to submit it.

Приветствую, 14 августа. Подавайтесь 15 августа иначе будет серьезная проблема.

Да, стоит доступно, если по почте посылать. Хотите сделать в личном визите за пару часов все - это будет +£610 госпошлины.

06 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> Court of Appeal reviews law on deportation cases involving EU derived rights of residence: <noindex>http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/85.html</noindex> Those with a derivative right of residence on Zambrano grounds must not [be] refused a residence permit on the sole ground that they have a criminal record, but deportation can be justified where the personal conduct of the third-country national constitutes a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat adversely affecting one of the fundamental interests of the society considering all relevant circumstances, in the light of the principle of proportionality.

Из недавнего. В зале ожидания нашего местного UK BA Premium Service Centre. Отправил форумчан пить кофе, жду решений. А вот и Settlement BRP карточки пришли через 3 дня.

Приветствую, Итак : 1. Прочитала все страницы темы 2 раза и нахожусь в сомнениях по поводу документов на жилье. Все же нужно их показывать или нет? - Нужно. Дом, в котором мы живем в моргадже, моргидж на мужа. Да и документов как таковых, кроме ежегодных стейтмент на могридж от банка нет - Land Registry можете показать 2. В данный момент мы находимся в процессе покупки нового дома, уже на нас обоих, но никаких окончательных бумаг еще не подписывали, ни по дому, ни по ипотеке. Въезжать в новое жилье будем в конце сентября-начале октября, а подавать на продление визы жены я буду 13 или 14 августа т.е на момент подачи на визу мы живем и платим моргидж на старый дом. Вопрос, нужно ли это как-то отражать в анкете в пункте 6.19 про дополнительный домашний адрес и вообще давать знать о грядущих изменениях в плане адреса и жилья? - Нет 3. Подаем финансовые документы по категории G, т.к муж директор Limited Company, а я company secretary. Плюс мы оба являемся shareholders в равных долях. Вопрос вот в чем: я хотела подавать на основании дохода мужа, т.к бумаг и так собирать целое море, но сегодня бухгалтер прислал макет сопроводительного письма в Home Office, в котором помимо общего оборота копании, мужа и его роли и доходов от деятельности компании, говорится и обо мне, как совладельце и прикладывается график получения мною дивидендов. Значит ли это, что мне нужно показывать и свой доход или это простая формальность, отражающая дела компании в целом? Просто очень не хочется перегружать caseworker ненужной информацией. - У Вас самая сложная финансова я категорию по Appendix FM и Вам нужен совет опытного адвоката, который Вы можете получить по телефону здесь: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex> 4. В п. 6.33 про shared financial responsibilities писать про joint account или сюда входит что-то еще? - Можете добавить household duties. 5. Очень запутал пункт 6.16 Are you and your sponsor related outside your relationship? Это о чем? - Спрашивают, не кровные ли Вы родственники ? Например, брат и сестра. 6. Сто раз прочитала и еще больше запуталась. Если я въехала в страну по визе невесты и подала на визу жены будучи в стране, значит ли это, что сейчас я подаю на second period of leave to remain или further period of leave to remain? - Первое.

Какое заявление подавали точно ?

03 August 2018 – Read the reviews about our assistance to immigrants and their families like yours :-) And as usual, the useful and just interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre - www.legalcentre.org – Mob : +44(0)7791145923 >>> New guidance on costs awards against the Home Office could transform immigration appeals: <noindex>https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads...idance-2018.pdf</noindex> In a highly significant development, the President of the First-tier Tribunal has issued a new guidance note on how migrants who win an appeal against the Home Office can seek legal costs from the department. The guidance envisages costs awards for “unreasonable conduct” where the Home Office contests an appeal “which is, objectively assessed, irresistible or obviously meritorious” and demands that officials carry out an initial assessment of whether an appeal should be defended within six weeks of it being lodged. Who should costs orders be made against? The guidance has two parts, reflecting the two different hearings held in the test cases. The first part considers whether an application for costs could be made against individual representatives of the Home Office (Home Office Presenting Officers), or only against the Home Office as a department. The decision of the Presidential panel was that it was inappropriate to make an Order against an individual HOPO. Although this issue was naturally of great importance to HOPOs, it was of less significance for Appellants. If a HOPO has acted unreasonably in the course of an appeal, the important thing for Appellants is that there is some sanction to discourage such conduct in future and that they are compensated for any additional legal expenses they incur as a result. Whether that sanction and compensation technically takes the form of an application for costs against the individual HOPO or against the Home Office more generally may make little practical difference. When is it unreasonable for the Home Office to defend a wrong decision? The second part of the guidance considers the wider question of the factors a Judge should consider when deciding if conduct has been unreasonable enough to justify an award of costs. It briefly addresses issues such as the period the costs award might cover, the latitude to be afforded to unrepresented litigants, and the need for Judges to give reasons for their decisions. The most significant part of the guidance sets out when it is unreasonable for the Home Office to defend an appeal at all. The Home Office’s published policy is to refuse to reconsider a decision, no matter how flawed, if there is a right of appeal to the Tribunal. During the appeal proceedings, Home Office practice has been not to consider the merits of their refusal decision until, at the very earliest, 24 to 48 hours before the full hearing, when the is file assigned to a Home Office Presenting Officer to prepare for the hearing. In some cases, it is only at this point that a conscientious HOPO would recognise that the decision was simply wrong and could not be defended – although even in many such cases, individual HOPOs were unable to get permission to withdraw the decision prior to the hearing and had to appear in court to defend what they knew was an indefensible decision. In cases where the Home Office did not send a representative to court, or where they instructed outside Counsel, there was simply no opportunity for the Home Office to withdraw even those most egregiously incorrect decisions. The decision of the Presidential Panel on this issue was that this behaviour was unlawful. The new Presidential Guidance makes it clear that it is unreasonable and may be grounds for an Appellant to be awarded their costs. The guidance sets out the following general principles: 1. It will “as a strong general rule, be unreasonable to defend – or continue to defend – an appeal which is, objectively assessed, irresistible or obviously meritorious.” 2. The Home Office should assess every refusal decision within six weeks of being notified that the appeal has been lodged. If the appeal is obviously meritorious, it is unreasonable for the Home Office not to make appropriate concessions or even withdraw the appeal at that point. 3. The Home Office should assess the decision again whenever there is any significant development in the law or the evidence. This means that Appellants whose applications may have been refused because of inadequate or missing evidence have a right to expect that the Home Office will review the refusal decision and withdraw it if appropriate after new evidence has been served. This could be shortly before the hearing, but it could be many months earlier. 4. These assessments must be carried out by a “reasonably competent civil servant”, presumed to be “properly qualified and sufficiently trained so as to adequately discharge the important function of representing a high-profile Government Minister in the self-evidently important sphere of immigration and asylum legal proceedings in a society governed by the rule of law.” This may give some encouragement to the many Home Office employees who work hard to do the right thing, but sometimes without the training or support they need. It also means that Appellants do have the right to expect that refusal decisions will be reviewed carefully, fairly, and in accordance with the law and the evidence, which has not always been the case in the past. This guidance is essential reading for anyone who feels that their application to the Home Office has been unfairly refused. As long as they have a right of appeal, they can now point to this guidance and urge the Home Office to reconsider the decisions that are clearly wrong, even long before the hearing. If the Home Office fails to respond, maintains the refusal decision for inadequate reasons, or only withdraws the decision at a very late stage, the Appellant should consider applying to the Tribunal for an order that the Home Office pay their costs in the appeal. The full case on which the guidance is based is unreported, but Appellants can nonetheless apply to the Tribunal to be allowed to rely on it. It contains helpful discussions of the reasoning behind the principles set out above, as well as applying these principles to the facts of the four individual cases. How is a costs application made? Applications for costs must be made to the Tribunal that heard the appeal and served on the Home Office. They must be made within 28 days of when an appeal is concluded. This could be within 28 days of when the Tribunal decides that the appeal should be treated as withdrawn (because the Home Office has withdrawn its refusal decision), or 28 days after the decision allowing the appeal is sent to the Appellant. There is no specific form or fee for this application. Because the law on when Appellants should be awarded their costs is new and still developing, it may be advisable for Appellants to seek legal advice and assistance before making a costs application. >>> Home Office “misled” judge over Calais children, Court of Appeal finds: <noindex>https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads...nal-31.7.18.pdf</noindex> The Home Office has been found in serious breach of its duty to the court after submitting misleading evidence about how it handled the rescue of refugee children from the demolished Calais “jungle” camp. The judgment in R (Citizens UK) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1812 was handed down recently.

Приветствую, Такие серьезные вопросы обсуждаются должным образом здесь : <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex>

Пожалуйста. Рад был помочь.