British Lawyer

Приветстую, Обратите внимание, что 6 месяцев отсчитываются с даты на Вашем Certificate of Application, а не с даты подачи заявления. Сейчас сроки рассмотрения с даты ПОДАЧИ документов уже подходят к 7 месяцам...

Приветствую, Да, может, но нужно доказать т.н. Sole Responsibility. Будьте аккуратны с т.н. "разрением отца", т.е. елси хотя бы ОДИН раз в таком письме будеит сказано, что отец РАЗРЕШАЕТ выезд ребенка за рубеж - будет практически 100% отказ, с которым потом очень сложно работать - говорю на оснвоании практически сотни консультаций по отказам из-за таких вот "разрешений". Проблема в том, что по-русски слово "разрешение" имеет практически противоположное (!!) значение в UK Immigration Law в отношении заявлений детей где нужно показать т.н. Sole Responsibility. Письмо от отца нужно, но оно пишется не совсем как "разрешение". Это мое know-how, желаете получить детальное описание - жде Ваш на консультацию: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex> Возможно и черновиком письма поделюсь - недавно в очередной раз 2 клиентки с Украины с этого форума получили визы жен - одна с 1 ребенком, другая - с 2 детьми.

Приветствую, Не возможно. UK BA защает своих сотрудников. Лет 5 назад слушалось дело о сотрудниках UK BA, кто плохо обращались с задержаным гражданином EU. Так вот на суде даже имена этих сотрудников UK BA были зашифрованы, т.е. были А и B. Насчет Вашей фразы "игнорируют адвокатов" - гм, "Может, что-то в консерватории подправиить?" (Жванецкий(С)). Как модератор форума и практикующий в Великобритании русскоговорящий адвокат высшей категории, позвольте поинтересоваться, что конкретно делали Ваши представители ? Возможно, Вы не до конца рассказали об их многократных и профессиональных усилиях повлиять на процесс ? Уточните детали.

Приветствую, Если Вы были в стране легально за последние 10 лет - можете подавать. Имеется в виду, что если Вы были в UK нелегально, потом тем или иным путем легализовались - Вам нужно ждать, чтобы прошло 10 лет с момента легализации.

Спонсорство, по т.н. "главенствованию": - сам заявитель - родтсвенники первого колена - все остальные родственники - не родственники (NB в случае такого спонсорства нужно доказывать связь, т.е. почему "чужой дяля спонсируем заявителя")

10 March 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ Non-EEA applicant's EEA Permanent Residence application and the need to travel overseas while the applicant's EEA(PR) application is being considered The following scenario could be useful to some of the applications, who may find themselves in the above-mentioned circumstances. The client A's job required a lot of travelling while A's EEA(PR) application was with the UK BA. The request to return the A's original passpprt from the UK BA was duly lodged with the reasons stating that the client would lose the job if the client would not able to fulfill the job duties. A stress was put on that the client did not want to withdraw the outstanding EEA(PR) application. The client received the passport from the UK BA and simply travelled outside of the UK with the Certificate of Application along with the client partner’s documents to show that the client remained a family member of a qualified EEA national and the client did not have any problems re-entering the UK

10 March 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ Non-EEA applicant's EEA Permanent Residence application and the need to travel overseas while the applicant's EEA(PR) application is being considered The following scenario could be useful to some of the applications, who may find themselves in the above-mentioned circumstances. The client A's job required a lot of travelling while A's EEA(PR) application was with the UK BA. The request to return the A's original passpprt from the UK BA was duly lodged with the reasons stating that the client would lose the job if the client would not able to fulfill the job duties. A stress was put on that the client did not want to withdraw the outstanding EEA(PR) application. The client received the passport from the UK BA and simply travelled outside of the UK with the Certificate of Application along with the client partner’s documents to show that the client remained a family member of a qualified EEA national and the client did not have any problems re-entering the UK

Приветствую, Тогда можете смело подавать вместе. По Brexit. Тереза Мей грозится запустить процесс 15 марта 2017 года. По видимому, сразу "достанется" тем EU гражданам, кто не является т.н qualified, т.е. жены из EU британцев, кто не работает и не имеет обязательной для self-sufficient категории т.н. private medical insurance. То же относится к "богатым" европейцам, кто не работает в UK и живет на сбережения и т.п. и НЕ ИМЕЕТ вышеуказанной страховки. Остальных, по-видимому, трогать не будут. Пока не будут.

Оправданная перестраховка, +1....... Так как:

Category A Employment - за 6 месяцев Category B Employment - за 12 + х

08 March 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ Who may not use the NHS and whose immigration applications may be refused by the UK BA/UK VAC if there was recourse to NHS in the past ? The Department of Health’s guidance (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/496951/Overseas_visitor_hospital_charging_accs.pdf) is useful in listing those who are “overseas chargeable patients”, which include: - those in the UK without the right to remain - those on visitor visas - those on visas as fiancé(e)s/proposed civil partners The current NHS debt threshold (that is, to trigger a refusal) is set at £500.00 ⦁ How one can increase his or her chances of success with the UK Visitor Visa application ? The ECO will be asking whether an applicant has a good reason to return to their home country. The strength of the evidence provided in relation to this area of the application will be key in determining its outcome. The Home Office provides guidance (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/549692/Visitor_Supporting_Documents_Guide_-_English_version.pdf) to applicants as to what type of documents they might submit. In order to demonstrate that applicants in full time work or study might be more likely to return after their visit (and are therefore genuine visitors), the guidance suggests that evidence of such full-time employment or full-time of study should be provided. Letters should be submitted from the relevant institutions on headed paper, and provide as much detail as possible on the nature of the applicant’s engagement (either work or study) in the home country. The stronger the evidence of the tie to the home country, the more likely an ECO will be persuaded that the applicant will leave at the end of the visit to resume the activity. In order to demonstrate that an applicant has the means to support him or herself during the course of the trip, the guidance suggests that financial documents are submitted, clearly showing access to the required funds, such as bank statements and proof of earnings such as a letter from an employer confirming the applicant’s employment details (e.g. start date of employment, salary, role, company contact details). It is possible to receive financial support from a third party (who is legally in the UK), and if this is the case then the third party should submit documents to show they have sufficient resources to support the applicant in addition to themselves and any dependant family. If the third party has previously sponsored visitors who have complied with the terms of their visa then this would also be useful evidence to provide in the form of a covering letter from them, with details of the previous sponsored visits. If the applicant has a good travel history – e.g. has previously complied with UK visa conditions, as well as immigration requirements in other developed countries (the guidance suggests ‘USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Schengen countries or Switzerland’) – then this will be something to make clear in the application. The guidance on documentary evidence suggests that previous passports (in addition to the current one) might be supplied to demonstrate this past compliance. ⦁ Tribunal on recorded video evidence and Article 8 considerations Official headnote to Lama (video recorded evidence -weight – Art 8 ECHR : Nepal) [2017] UKUT 16 (IAC): (i) Video recorded evidence from witnesses is admissible in the Upper Tribunal. Its weight will vary according to the context. (ii) Alertness among practitioners and parties to the Upper Tribunal’s standard pre-hearing Directions and compliance therewith are crucial. (iii) There are no hard and fast rules as to what constitutes family life within the compass of Article 8 ECHR. (iv) A person’s value to the community is a factor which may legitimately be considered in the Article 8 proportionality balancing exercise. ⦁ Updated Home Office guidance on criminality in article 8 ECHR cases: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...le-8-echr-cases</noindex>

Заполните - отстанут, возможно.

Приветствую, Итак: Добрый день, дорогие форумчане.Хочу спросить совета.Хотим с мужем подать на EEA FP, хотим вьезжать вместе. Я - eu national, муж -non eu.В браке 5 ый год, имеем дочь. Хотим переехать в юк, у меня там сестра. - OK Кто-нибудь подавал документы, вьезжая всем вместе?Каковы шансы получить благоприятный ответ, на что следует обратить внимание. - Это врамках закона. Шансы получить положительно решение увеличатся, если покажите, что муж имеет шансы на работу в UK (резюме, ответа на E-mail с предложением на работу и т.п.) Супруг на данный момент еще работает,все доки впорядке.Имеет в паспорте шенген мультивизу и американскую. Я не работаю, имеем квартиру. - Не понятнь, где работает Ваш супруг. П.с. может ли сестра написать, что будем оставаться первое время у нее? ( в сопровод.письме,например),так как квартиры и работы пока у нас нет. - Может

06 March 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ It may be possible to submit an out of time application under the EEA law because: Article 25 of Directive 2004/38EC states: 1. Possession of a registration certificate as referred to in Article 8, of a document certifying permanent residence, of a certificate attesting submission of an application for a family member residence card, of a residence card or of a permanent residence card, may under no circumstances be made a precondition for the exercise of a right or the completion of an administrative formality, as entitlement to rights may be attested by any other means of proof. EUN2.20 What are the visa endorsements for EEA family permits? After entry to the UK the holder can apply to the Home Office for a residence card. A residence card (an endorsement in the holder’s passport) enables the holder to re-enter the UK without the need for an EEA family permit for as long as they are the family member of an EEA national with a right of residence in the UK. A residence card, which is normally valid for five years, is simply a confirmation of the holder’s right of residence in the UK – it is not a compulsory requirement. That means that the expiry of a non-compulsory document should have no baring on the issue of an migrant's expired EEA Residence Card ⦁ What is the date of the in-country (UK) application ? "203. For applications made in the UK, the date of application is taken to be the date of posting or, where the application form is sent by courier, the date on which it is delivered to us, for online applications this is taken to be the date of submission, or where the application form is submitted in person, the day the application form is accepted by our premium service centre (PSC).". Recent case-law ⦁ Case note from Jed Pennington on N v SSHD CO/3882/2016, settled bail judicial review (1 March 2017) Summary: N applied for bail accommodation under s.4(1)© of the Immigration Act 1999 to facilitate his release from immigration detention. Due to delay in sourcing this, he offered the address of a friend with whom he could stay short term so as not to delay his release. He was released with electronic tagging and a residence condition at this address. He was told that his application for bail accommodation had been ‘voided’ by supplying his friend’s address, and he had been released on a Restriction Order (RO) rather than bail, so there was no power to supply bail accommodation. He was told to make an application for support under s.4(2) of the 1999 Act. However, this would be refused because he was not prepared to make a voluntary departure. N contended that the SSHD should re-impose the conditions as bail rather than the RO so as to allow bail accommodation to be provided under s.4(1)© to enable him to comply with electronic monitoring conditions. He judicially reviewed the SSHD’s failure to do so, arguing that it was irrational to impose conditions without offering the means to comply. The Administrative Court ordered the SSHD to provide s.4 support on an interim basis despite N remaining on the RO. The SSHD then issued a new RO with electronic tagging at the address provided to comply with the Court’s order, yet applied to the Court to evict N. Following further submissions, the SSHD did replace the RO with a grant of bail, and ultimately conceded the JR following the grant of permission with a consent order providing for support to continue. The case demonstrates that the SSHD can move someone to bail who has been conditionally released under another statutory power if release on bail is necessary to provide him with bail accommodation to enable compliance with the conditions of his release. ⦁ UB (Sri Lanka) v SSHD [2017] EWCA Civ 85 (3 March 2017) Of particular interest in this case is that the Court of Appeal finds ‘the clearest obligation’ on the Secretary of State to serve her past policy documents (in this case a past country policy on Sri Lanka) and ensure that they are before the Tribunal. The Court cites AA (Afghanistan) v SSHD (2007) EWCA Civ 12 : "27. [it was submitted by the appellant that] the attention of the adjudicator should have been drawn by the Secretary of State's representative to the policy on interviewing unaccompanied minors, so as to avoid him being misled: see R v. Special Adjudicator, ex parte Kerrouche (1997) Imm AR 610 28. As a matter of law, that is right. The Secretary of State should draw relevant parts of his policy to the adjudicator's attention. Merely because those policy documents are publicly available in print or on a website is not enough: where issues of risk of persecution are involved, a decision to return a person or not to his country of origin should not depend on the diligence of that person's representatives." (Keene LJ) and Mandalia v SSHD (2015 1 WLR 4546 (2015) UKSC 59): "irrespective of whether the specialist judge might reasonably be expected himself to have been aware of it, the Home Office presenting officer clearly failed to discharge his duty to draw it to the tribunal's attention as policy of the agency which was at least arguably relevant to Mr Mandalia's appeal." (paragraph 19 per Lord Wilson) Lord Justice Irwin stated in UB (Sir Lanka) “21. I deprecate any suggestion that this obligation of service is displaced or diminished by the availability of the material online. Mr Hare for the Secretary of State did not in fact mount this argument, although it seems likely from exchanges before the hearing that he was pressed to do so. He was right to decline such an argument. Apart from the clear obligation in law derived from authority, many appellants in immigration and asylum cases are unrepresented. In a number of cases where there is legal representation, the quality of representation is less than optimal. 22, The obligation is clear but must not be taken beyond the proper bounds. There is no obligation on the Secretary of State to serve policy or guidance which is not in truth relevant to the issues in hand, and complaints as to alleged failures of disclosure of material which is truly peripheral or irrelevant should readily be rejected. “

Приветствую, Да, эта форма уже как несколько лет тому назад заменрила EEA3/4.

На этой неделе: - Заявление клиента на Retained Right of Residence - EEA(FM), было очень млао документов о совместном проживании. Рассмотрели положительно за 6.5 месяца - Заявление клиентки и ее детей 21 и 27 лет на Permanent Residence - EEA(PR) - рассмотрели заявление положительно за 6.5 месяцев. Что интересно - старший ребенок 27 лет уже работал.

03 March 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ The UK BA recently approved an EEA(PR) application where client had 2 short gaps in his working history over the 5 years. The first gap is about 6 weeks after being in qualifying employment for about 18 months and the other is 2 months about a year later. On both occasions he had a job start arranged and that is why he did not register for JSA or apply for other jobs. The rest of the 5 years was continued employment

Premium Service может забронировать и отдельно от бумажной анкеты. Я на этой неделе так для очередной клиенки с этого форума делал. Взяли слот на конец марта в нашем сестном PEO, где я уж 12 лет подаю подобные заявления: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/viza-za-1-den.html</noindex>

Да, могу помочь. Форма называется EEA(QP).

01 March 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ Following MM judgment, Home Office pauses decision-making on applications not meeting minimum income threshold (27 February 2017) The following message has been posted on VFS Global websites (so far have seen VFS UAE, USA and India). 'Following a Supreme Court judgment, the Home Office has paused decision-making on some applications - in particular, those failing to meet the minimum threshold for British citizens sponsoring a non-EEA partner and non-EEA children. The reason for this pause is to enable the Home Office to consider the implications of the judgment. All other applications will continue to be processed and decided as normal'. ⦁ The Civil Legal Aid (Immigration Interviews) (Exceptions) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 (27 February 2017): ⦁ <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/192/contents/made</noindex> The 2012 Civil Legal Aid (Immigration Interviews) (Exceptions) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/6283) made provision for payment for attendance at interview by reference to centres at which the detained fast track operated. These regulations replace that reference with one to particular centres: Colnbrook, Harmondswoth,Yarls Wood. It is highly doubtful whether the Legal Aid Agency has had power to pay for attendance at Detained Asylum Casework interviews since the fast track was suspended. ⦁ There was only one Discretionary Leave Policy pre- the 2012 changes. For extensions, those who were previously refused asylum should normally use FLR(DL), others - FLR(HRO). For settlement, FLR(DL) or SET(O). Both require a fee, neither require KoLL. ⦁ Brexit/Article 50 cut-off date ? The following press article should hopefully provide some clarification or reassurance for those who are puzzled by this questions, unless the UK Government advsies otherwise: <noindex>https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/f...-no-10-suggests</noindex> At present EU law remains applicable and will do so until the UK and EU sign a withdrawal agreement. It is very unlikely that the cut-off date on which EU residence rights could no longer be claimed in the UK would pre-date the agreement ⦁ Home Office Premium rate Phone Number 0141 555 6027 – check your phone bill ! Colleagues have recently identified a massive rise in their phone bills. The problem traced this to the above phone number which is a UK Visas and Immigration number dealing with sponsor matters. The problem arises because when you dial and the number is engaged, which it oh so frequently is, instead of an engaged tone you get a message saying it is engaged and you get charged at premium rates to hear that message. Given that firms are frequently on permanent redial for hours and hours to the number, attempting to get through, the resultant bills at 18p a pop, however quickly you put the phone down, are astronomical. The problem appears to have come about as it gets harder and harder to get through to the number. You are strongly advised to check your phone bills to see whether you are affected. ⦁ UK Visas and Immigration Guidance: Criminality guidance in article 8 ECHR cases (27 February 2017) Version 6 of 22 February 2017, stated to contain additional sections to reflect the Supreme Court judgment in Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] and the European Court of Justice judgement in Ruiz Zambrano (European citizenship) [2011] ECJ - 34/09: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...le-8-echr-cases</noindex>

Supreme Court upholds Minimum Income Rule of £18,600 to sponsor foreign spouses In linked judgments in the case of MM and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 10 the Supreme Court has upheld in principle the Minimum Income Rule which requires an income of at least £18,600 for British citizens and others to sponsor a foreign spouse. However, the court also held that the rules and policies used by the Home Office to assess such cases would need to be amended to take proper account of the impact on children and other possible sources of income and support.

Приветствую, Итак: - пока действует и бумажная, и on-line формы - анкета только одна, без дополнительных анкет, как на Entry Clearance - письмо от работодателя на фирменном бланке, с подписью, должно давать ответы на следующие пункты на основании существующего Appendix FM Financial: A letter from the employer(s) who issued the payslips at paragraph 2(a) confirming: (i) the person's employment and gross annual salary; (ii) the length of their employment; (iii) the period over which they have been or were paid the level of salary relied upon in the application; and (iv) the type of employment (permanent, fixed-term contract or agency).

23 February 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre ENG: Legal Centre’s Services at a glance: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/</noindex> RUS: Вкраце об услугах Legal Centre: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> ⦁ Application NTL requires a previous grant of ILR/ILE status ⦁ ILR automatically lapses is a migrant is absent from the UK in excess of 2 years. Article 13(4)(a) of the Order states as follows: "...where the holder has stayed outside the United Kingdom for a continuous period of more than two years, the leave (where the leave is unlimited) or any leave then remaining (where the leave is limited) shall thereupon lapse…" ⦁ Returning Residents Guidance: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...esidents-set-09</noindex> ⦁ UK Visas and Immigration Guidance: Employer sponsorship: restricted certificate allocations (23 February 2017) : <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ate-allocations</noindex>

По-русски это "частный предприниматель".

Заявление семьи клиентов, муж, жена, ребенок - Representative of an Overseas Company. Рассмотрели за 2 недели. Как всегда, первичные визы выдали на 30 дней, нужно приехать в UK и забрать BRP на 3 года.