British Lawyer

24 January 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> · Brexit Update: The UK Prime Minister, Theresa May must seek the UK parliament's approval to trigger the Article 50 following the UK Supreme Court's Judgement today, on the 24th January 2017: <noindex>https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/l...t-politics-live</noindex> - Lords Library Note on 'Leaving the European Union: The Single Market, the Rights of EU Citizens in the UK and the UK’s Future Economic Requirements', LLN 2017/006, 20 January 2017 <noindex>http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/Res...y/LLN-2017-0006</noindex> - Changes to process for UK settlement visa applicants in Australia UK Visas & Immigration is changing the way UK settlement visa applicants in Australia submit their supporting documents. From 30 January, 2017, all supporting documents should be sent to the UK address below by the sponsor or applicant: PO Box 5852, Sheffield, S11 0FX, United Kingdom Applicants can also choose a new service in which their documents will be scanned and submitted by our commercial partner, VFS Global, for an additional fee. The UK BA aims to make a decision on a settlement visa in 60 working days. If you have opted for our Settlement Priority Visa Service, your application will be put at the front of the queue and the decision expedited. Further guidance on the new process will be posted on our website <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...y-for-a-uk-visa</noindex> and the VFS Global website www.vfsglobal.co.uk/Australia in the coming days. · Request for Tier 2 unrestricted CoS allocation From th UK BA: "Due to the high demand for this service it is not always possible to get through to the payment line and we are aware of Customers needing to make multiple attempts. Unfortunately, at present the only way to obtain the Priority service is by phone, and you will need to persist with the helpline. UKVI are constantly looking at way to improve the services we offer and your feedback is important to us. It has been shared with the project team who are reviewing the capacity of the service and will help inform future decisions in relation to this service. There are 20 slots available each working day, these are allocated on a first come first served basis. The telephone line opens at 9am and the first 20 people to get through and pay the fee are allocated slots, the system does not have a queuing facility and callers will receive a message when the line is engaged. Once all slots are allocated the telephone message will be updated to advise callers of this. We will on occasions answer the telephone after all slots are allocated, this is to help us gather information on demand to help inform any future decisions on increasing the number of slots available.". Recent case-law: High Court declares Detained Fast Track Appeals Procedure Rules 2005 unlawful: R (TN (Vietnam) & US (Pakistan)) v SSHD [2017] EWHC 59 (Admin), 20 January 2017 BAILII case link: <noindex>http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2017/59.html</noindex> The High Court has made a declaration that the Detained Fast Track Appeals Procedure Rules in force between 2005 and 2014 were unlawful. In R (TN (Vietnam) & US (Pakistan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2017] EWHC 59 (Admin) (20 January 2017), the High Court has held that the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Fast Track Procedure) Rules 2005, SI 2005/560, which were in force until October 2014, were unlawful. The later fast track appeals procedure rules, in the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Rules 2014 SI 2014/2604, in force from October 2014 were found unlawful in an earlier challenge brought by Detention Action. The judgment then considers how decisions made on cases under the fast track procedure rules in force should be dealt with.

Из последних 20-25 почтовых заявлений клиентов, в 18 случаях сначала приходили BRP, в 7 других случаях - сначала призодили документы, а потом BRP. В одном случае сначала курьер DX принес BRP клиента, а через пару часов почтвльен Royal Mail - документы клиента.

Пожалуйста. Рад был помочь.

Из почтовых заявлений моих клиентов, одобреные UK BA на днях: - Settlement для Sole Representative (анкета SET(BUS): 5.2 месяца - EEAFM для non-EEA: 5.5 месяцев - EEAPR для EU: 4 месяца - EEAPR для non-EEA: 6 месяцев и 1 неделя - EEAQP для EU: 1.5 месяца В <noindex>личном визите</noindex> все делается за 3.5 часа в среднем: - Виза жены/unmarried partner (FLR(M)) - Settlement (SET(O)) Tier 1, Tier 2 - Settlement (SET(M)) жена британца/лица с ILR - Перенос статуса (форма NTL) и т.п....

Да, можете подать. Это называется joined applications, т.к. некотрые документы будут в единственном числе в любом случае. Анкеты на каждого заявителя оформляются отдельно.

Приветствую, Развод в UK может длиться от 6 месяцев и до.... Украинский развод засчитывается. На другие заявления развод в UA не влияет. Единственное, что с UK Decree Absolute проще - не нужно переводы и т.п. quote name='Warm-as-wool' date='14.1.2017, 22:49' post='1142295'] Добрый вечер, форумчане. Я – украинка, замужем за британцем 4,5 года. Сейчас начала по-думывать о разводе и хочу исследовать информацию каким образом это быстрее и проще сделать. Расписались в центральном ЗАГСе Киева в мае 2012. Переехала в Англию по визе жены в августе 2012. Получила ILR в сентябре 2014 и британский паспорт в феврале 2016. Детей нет. В предыдущих браках не состояли. Банковские счета раздельные. Моргич на нынешний дом, который купили 6 мес. назад оформлен только на имя мужа, но я на него претендовать не собираюсь. Я работаю full-time с марта 2013 года и вполне могу себя сама в Англии обеспечить. То есть скажем у нас выходит развод по обоюдному согласию, детей нет, финансовых разногласий тоже нет. Какая процедура будет самая простая и относительно быстрая? Если в Киеве, то разведет ли нас центральный ЗАГС без суда? Позволит ли личный совместный визит в ЗАГС нас взвоем оформить развод за 1 день (1 визит в Киев на 2-3 дня)? Можно ли заказать два оригинала свидетельства о разводе? Потом Свидетельство о разводе мы апостируем в Мин.юсте и нотариально заверяем перевод. Если я оставлю фамилию мужа, то верно ли я предполагаю, что НЕ надо будет менять укр.паспорт и ИНН, Правильно ли я понимаю процедуру в принципе? Как будет обстоять дела с разводом в Англии? Тот факт, что я собираюсь продолжать жить в Англии и потенциально выйти замуж опять в будущем, влияет как-то на предпочтительность оформления развода в Англии? Какая примерно будет процедура для наших обстоятельств и сколько это может занять? Спасибо больше за ваши ответы и любую информацию о том, как лучше поступить.

+1................

Приветствую Пока платят зарплату. Потом может перейти на некоторый срок на бенефит JSA, например. Далее - аккуратно. Без работы и без бенефитов может быть не больше 91 дня...Иначе - обрыв резиденции.

20 January 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> Tier 5 Youth Mobility (Working Holiday Maker) Visa Processing Change (19 January 2017) “With immediate effect, Youth Mobility visas can now be post-dated by a maximum of 6 months from the application date (the date the fee is paid). Please let your clients know. The website has already been updated. This only applies to the Youth Mobility Scheme. All other categories can only be post-dated up to a maximum of 3 months from the application date.” Reent case-law Paposhvili v Belgium, App. No. 41738/10, European Court of Human Rights In Paposhvili v Belgium, App. No. 41738/10, the European Court of Human Rights concluded that “the application of Article 3 of the Convention only in cases where the person facing expulsion is close to death, which has been its practice since the judgment in N. v. the United Kingdom, has deprived aliens who are seriously ill, but whose condition is less critical, of the benefit of that provision.” (paragraph 181) The court proceeds to ‘clarify’ (using the word in the Home Office’s sense of ‘change’) its approach. The court holds that the reference in in N. v. the United Kingdom (Application no. 26565/05; judgment of the Grand Chamber of 28 May 2008) to “other very exceptional cases” which may raise an issue under Article 3 should be understood to refer to “situations involving the removal of a seriously ill person in which substantial grounds have been shown for believing that he or she, although not at imminent risk of dying, would face a real risk, on account of the absence of appropriate treatment in the receiving country or the lack of access to such treatment, of being exposed to a serious, rapid and irreversible decline in his or her state of health resulting in intense suffering or to a significant reduction in life expectancy”. At issue is the negative obligation not to expose persons to a risk of ill‑treatment proscribed by Article 3, comparing their health prior to removal and subsequent to any transfer. The court reiterates that the benchmark is not the health care system in the returning State. Instead the focus is on the individual and their suffering. That the country to which the person is to be returned is a party to the Convention is not decisive of the matter (citing M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, Appl. no. 30696/09, judgment of of 21 January 2001 and Tarakhel v Switzerland, Appl.no. 29217/12 , judgment of 4 November 2014. The court also found that removal would violate Article 8. The case has the potential to put an end to the long line of injustice and suffering that has resulted from the N judgment and those with clients with terminal or chronic illnesses should consider making fresh representations and amending pleadings in the light of it. Supreme Court on 3C leave and invalid applications In R (Mirza, Iqbal & Ehsan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 63 (14 December 2016), the UK Supreme Court has ruled that leave is not extended under section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 where it later turns out that the application made for further leave to enter or remain was invalid. This means that a person whose application to extend their leave turns out to be invalid after their leave has expired does not benefit from 3C leave, including during the period before the mistake is discovered. The Supreme Court based its findings on the application of ordinary principles of statutory interpretation and considered that the drafters of the relevant legislation could be assumed to have taken its practical implications into account. However, the Court was critical of the Home Office for not having addressed the difficulties caused by the lack of flexibility.

18 January 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> • Updated UK Visas and Immigration Guidance: Transfer of conditions, Version 12.0 (16 January 2016): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...r-of-conditions</noindex> UK Visas and Immigration guidance on how staff process transfer of condition applications for applicants who have limited leave endorsed in a passport that is lost, stolen, damaged or due to expire and need to transfer their visa to a biometric residence permit (BRP). Changes from last version of this guidance: Minor housekeeping changes and placing the guidance into the new format Recent case-law: • Chin and Another (former BOC/Malaysian national – deportation) [2017] UKUT 00015 (IAC) Tribunals Service link: <noindex>https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2017-ukut-15</noindex> The deportation of a former Malaysian national and former BOC is liable to be deemed unlawful where relevant Government Policies relating to inter-state arrangements with Malaysia have not been taken into account or given effect. • VA (Solicitor’s non-compliance: counsel’s duties) Sri Lanka [2017] UKUT 00012 (IAC) Tribunals Service link: <noindex>https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2017-ukut-12</noindex> (i) Counsel’s duty is owed to the client. It does not extend to defending non-compliant instructing solicitors. (ii) It is for non-compliant instructing solicitors to defend themselves by proactively arranging their attendance before the tribunal in appropriate circumstances.

Собственно говоря: Brexit update, 17-01-2017, following Theresa May’s speech on Brexit today Theresa May, has today highlighted the Government's commitment to limit free movement of European citizens, as one of its top priorities in the upcoming negotiations with the European Union. This would mean that EEA nationals, arriving in the UK following Brexit are likely to face new travel and work related restrictions, the exact details of which are yet to be devised. The PM further indicated that the Government would push for a 'phased period of implementation' which could mean that any new arrangements, including those in relation to immigration, do not kick in immediately on completion of the two year period following the triggering of Article 50 (expected in March 2017). Whilst Mrs May has reaffirmed her intention to guarantee the status of EEA nationals already residing in the UK as soon as possible, this would hinge on British Citizens residing in other Member States receiving the same protections, which may take months, or indeed years to agree on. Mrs May's speech therefore brings little comfort to businesses and individuals alike who now face an agonising wait, while the Government negotiates this issue with its European counterparts, to see if they would be able to secure their current and future workforce or status in the UK. It remains the Legal Centre’s, then and now, that EEA nationals (and their family members) consider applying to the Home Office for documentation recognising their rights of residence/permanent residence in the UK (and, where appropriate, naturalise as British) to put them in the strongest position when Brexit finally is implemented. We are here to help: www.legalcentre.org , 077 91145 923, 0330 001 0342

Update Пока (на 16-01-2017) изменения по данной категории нет.

Пожалуйста. Обратите внимание, что я дал Вам ссылку на первоисточник. Если Вы ищите ответ от третьего лица, не факт, что Вы получите правильную инфоомацию....

Список документов хороший, но нужно знать их содержание. Например, письмо от Вашего работодателя должно седержать информацию о том, что за Вами закрепляется место работы и т.п. и т.п. Так, на вскидку, список документов проверить не возможно для того, чтобы убедиться в правильности. Съкономьте время и деньги, закажите вот эту стандартную услугу, которую у меня регулярно заказывают форумчане: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/proverka-zayavleniy.html</noindex>

Forestgump, Форумчане часто путают формальные названия документов....

16 January 2017 - UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre Помощь юриста: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/language.php?lang=ru</noindex> Помощь психолога: <noindex>www.antonkoval.com</noindex> Recent case-law • Shabir Ahmed and others (sanctions for non–compliance) [2016] UKUT 00562 (IAC): <noindex>https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/u...c/2016-ukut-562</noindex> Head note Persistent and egregious non-compliance with Upper Tribunal orders, directions and rules will attract appropriate sanctions. Case note In a strongly worded judgment by McCloskey, J (President) and Holmes, J (Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge), the Upper Tribunal criticises the conduct of the parties in the four cases before it and in other recent cases, including the three recent ‘ETS’ cases. Conduct criticised in the present cases included failure to comply with directions or seek clarification of these, failure to seek a case management review hearing if appropriate, repeated unmeritorious requests to adjourn the hearing, failure to provide a hearing bundle or skeleton argument. The Tribunal held: To describe this state of affairs as grossly unsatisfactory is an acute understatement. The Upper Tribunal has been treated with sustained and marked disrespect. The conduct of these appeals has been cavalier and unprofessional. The rule of law has been weakened in consequence. (§7) The Upper Tribunal gave a warning of how it would treat misconduct in the future: “The Upper Tribunal will, henceforth, have recourse to the full panoply of sanctions at its disposal. These include in particular wasted costs orders. There will also be reporting of rulings of this kind. Furthermore, consideration will be given to the invocation of the Upper Tribunal’s contempt powers, together with referrals to professional bodies. (§10)”. • Naturalization applications, the point on the hospital orders. It is worth noting that the hospital orders will remain on the applicant’s criminal record. The applicant’s GP should know whether and when the patient was ‘conditionally’ or ‘absolutely’ discharged. See paragraph 3.7 of the Good Character requirement as to the impact of hospital orders. • PBS Maintenance. Para 1A(h) of Appendix C explains that: “(h) the end date of the 90-day and 28-day periods referred to in ( and © above will be taken as the date of the closing balance on the most recent of the specified documents (where specified documents from two or more accounts are submitted, this will be the end date for the account that most favours the applicant), and must be no earlier than 31 days before the date of application”. That means that the so-called “90 day period” is counted backwards from the date of the closing balance, not forward from the applicant’s date of choice. That should be taking into consideration when submitting the bank statements with the PBS applications. • Updated Home Office guidance on permission to work and volunteer for asylum seekers: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ent-instruction</noindex> Changes since the last version of the guidance: - updated to include reference to criminality and delay when considering permission to work applications - improved guidance on applying for permission to work to provide clarity for claimants on what is expected - updated information about the difference between working for a voluntary organisation and volunteering to make clearer that asylum seekers are able to volunteer - new guidance template applied, and section and paragraph numbering removed in line with guidance requirements • Total of 31 illegal immigrants removed from UK as a result of Right to Rent: <noindex>http://www.propertyindustryeye.com/total-o...-right-to-rent/</noindex>

Приветствую, Понятно. Да, способ есть. Я давал ссылку раньше на сайт UK BA. Доплатить разницу в £400.00 и в течение 5 рабочих дней "обещают рассмотреть".

Ну и отлично. Насчет страховки, КОГДА ОНА НУЖНА (SELF-SUFFICIENCY) - ОНА ДОЛЖНА БЫТЬ НА ВСЕХ ЧЛЕНОВ СЕМЬИ И ДОЛЖНЫ БЫТЬ PRIVATE COMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL INSURANCE (BUPA, AVIVA И Т.П.).

Приветствую, Соответствующий Guidance Вам в помощь: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...funds_v13.0.pdf</noindex>

У меня, как всегда, есть, несколько заявлений в неделю возвразаются положительно рассмотрены из UK BA. - Около 6.2 месяца для стандартных случаев. - Тем, кому документы возвращали из-за невозможности снятия оплаты, после переподачи - 4.5 месяца.

В общем, добавить-то и нечего...

11 January 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> Updated UK BA Guidance • Points-based system: Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...eptional-talent</noindex> - This version explains the new online application process introduced on 19 December 2016 • Guidance on application for UK visa under Tier 5 (Temporary Worker): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...emporary-worker</noindex> • Guidance for dependants of UK visa applicants (Tiers 1, 2, 4, 5): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...s-1-2-4-5Family</noindex> members of points-based system migrants: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...system-migrants</noindex> - Updated to allow sponsors to underwrite maintenance for Dependants of Tier 5 migrantsPoints-based system: Tier 5 (Temporary Worker): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...emporary-worker</noindex> - This guidance has been changed to reflect Immigration Rules changes made in November 2016 • Points-based system: Tier 2: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...d-system-tier-2</noindex> • Visitor guidance update: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visit-guidance</noindex> • Criminal records checks for overseas applicants (20th December 2016): Criminal records checks for overseas applicants (20th December 2016) - Who can apply, how to apply and contact details for criminal record checks overseas • Returns preparation: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...rns-preparation</noindex> • PBS Dependents’ certain absences from the UK may lead to the PBS dependents’ losing the right to apply for Settlement in line with the recent Statement of changes: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...3-november-2016</noindex> : “In paragraph 319E(d)(ii) insert after ©: “In this sub-paragraph “continuous” means an unbroken period and for this purpose a period shall not be considered to have been broken in any of the circumstances set out in paragraph 245AAA(a)(i) to (iii).”.” • Entry clearance applications as a partner under Appendix FM – acceptable English language tests. See: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...est_Centres.pdf</noindex> clarified that the applicant needs a test from the list in Table 1, and it only mentions IELTS Life Skills and IELTS for UKVI General • Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman upholds three in four complaints about the Home Office: <noindex>http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/news-...-report-reveals</noindex> • The President of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the Upper Tribunal has found that the Home Office abused its power in forcing a college to expel a student and deliberately depriving him of a statutory right of appeal: <noindex>https://www.channel4.com/news/home-office-a...power-over-visa</noindex> Recent case-law: • R (on the application of Mohibullah) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (TOEIC – ETS – judicial review principles) [2016] UKUT 00561 (IAC) Tribunals Service link: <noindex>https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/u...c/2016-ukut-261</noindex> (i) Where there is a multiplicity of decision making mechanisms, some generating a right of appeal and others not, there is a public law duty on the decision maker to be aware of the options and to take same into account when opting for a particular mechanism. (ii) Where a Tier 4 Student is considered to have made false representations, thereby being liable to discretionary curtailment of leave and has been withdrawn from a course, thereby being liable to mandatory curtailment action there is a duty on the Secretary of State to consider both of the corresponding sections in the “Curtailment of Leave” policy guidance. (iii) A failure to give effect to policy guidance without justification is in breach of the Lumba principle and renders the ensuing decision vulnerable to being quashed. (iv) Where a curtailment of leave decision is underpinned by the Secretary of State’s decision that leave to remain had been procured by deception, the appropriate standard of review is the Wednesbury principle rather than proof of the precedent fact of deception. (v) A decision which has a conspicuously unfair impact on the subject may qualify for condemnation as unreasonable, or irrational, in contravention of the Wednesbury principle. (vi) The student’s knowledge of an allegation by ETS that he has procured his TOEIC certificate by deception will normally suffice to convey the gist of the case against him, thereby rendering the Secretary of State’s decision making process (in this respect) procedurally fair.

Приветствую, Все мои клиенты просят оформить <noindex>ILR за 1 день</noindex> что, в принципе, я делаю 1-2 раза в неделю в нашем местном отделении UK BA. У Вас какая иммиграционная категория ? Какую анкету Вы подавли. Переодически звонят заявители, кто подали сами и по почте, ждут х месяцев (обычно больше 6), т.к. UK BA сейчас завален заявлениями...

Приветствую, Стараюсь. Это принцип моей работы

Меня тоже пару раз попробовали "отправить". Я представился кто я и попросил копию нашей беседы с занесением всех моих вопросов и их ответов в файл (врач всегда делает записи). Сразу отношение поменялось. Недавно, перед поездкой в отпуск, глаз начал чесаться, подозрение (сам определил, т.к. было раньше) на инфекию. Дозвонился до врачей, сказал, что это уже было у меня и у меня и мне нужен антибиотик. Мне сказали, чтобы заехал за лекарством вечером. Вчером заехал к GP. Жду в очереди за лекарствами. У GP один дежурный врач (глава практики, такой весь из себя....). И вот решил он меня вызвать и начал отговаривать от антибиотика. Вежливо но настойчиво начал грузить. А я в очереди ждал 1 час и завтра мне на самолет...В машине 3 детей ждут еще...Родители меня поймут... Пришлось опять напомнить кто я и для чего я к нему обратился: ".....I am a practicing top category lawyer. I must have 100% concentration and I cannot afford being distracted working with my clients, with my eyes failing me". Делее последовала небольшая дуэль с использование counseling & NLP (я так же имею несколько квалификаций по психологии и клиническому гипнозу, который я использую при необходимости: <noindex>www.antonkoval.com</noindex>). Результат - через 5 минут у меня на руках было лекарство и я на следующий день улетел за рубеж в отпуск. Лекарство помогло. Вывод. Нет ничего невозможно.