British Lawyer

В РБ граждан из стран блока НАТО разве берет на службу в армию РБ, включая лиц с двойным гражданством ?

Это обсолютный минимум. Не раз обращались клиенты, кто шел по пути минимализма - поулчали письма из UK BA с просьбой дослать (и на много больше в таком случае документов). Я рекомнедую приложить немного больше минимума - это всегда помогало моим клиентам получатит положительные решения сразу.

10-11-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre We can help you - Вы можем Вам помочь <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> - ENGLISH <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex> - ПО-РУССКИ •According to the UK BA, a long term visitor visa holder would be able to use his/her long term visitor visa for private medical treatment. Following simplification of the visitor routes of entry from the 24th April 2015, a visitor (other than a transit visitor or an Approved Destination Status visitor) may carry out any of the visitor permitted activities set out in Appendix 3 to Appendix V of the UK Immigration Rules without the need to apply for more than one visa •The UK BA Section 3 Leave Guidance (version April 2016) apparently has an error in it, asserting that section 3C leave is not restored where the certification under the Section 94 or the Section 94B or the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (the 2002 Act) is withdrawn. •Draft Immigration Act 2014 (Current Accounts) (Excluded Accounts and Notification Requirements) Regulations 2016 laid before Parliament (7 November 2016) The Immigration Act 2016 (Commencement No.2 and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2016 brought into force section 45 and Schedule 7 of the Act on current bank accounts for the purpose of making subordinate legislation only. The draft Immigration Act 2014 (Current Accounts) (Excluded Accounts and Notification Requirements) Regulations 2016 were laid before parliament on 7 November. They indicate they will come into force on 31 October 2017. This reflects the indication given by the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd MP, in her speech to the Conservative Party conference that the new Immigration Act 2016 provisions would be applied by banks from autumn 2017 : <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2016/9...11151150_en.pdf</noindex> •EU scrutiny Committee: 17th Report - Documents considered by the Committee on 2 November 2016 From the Home Office: Implementing the EU-Turkey agreement on migration <noindex>http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/c.../71-xv/7102.htm</noindex> The EU Scrutiny Committee considers the European Commission’s third Communication reviewing the implementation of the EU-Turkey agreement and the Home Office memorandum in response. The Committee had recommended following both the first and second Communications that the issues were debated in parliament and restates this with some frustration: 13.4 [...] We consider that as a result of the Government’s delaying tactics the accumulation of relevant documents is such that a debate encompassing all of them would do justice to none of them. 13.5 We note that the Government has committed to make time available for a series of general debates on the UK’s future relationship with the EU. We share the Commission’s view that migration is likely to remain “one of the defining issues for Europe” for decades to come. It is imperative that the debates promised by the Government address the basis for future cooperation between the EU and the UK on migration. As recent events in Calais demonstrate, the asylum policies and systems in place in other Member States will have an important bearing on the flow of asylum seekers and irregular migrants seeking to enter the UK, not only while the UK remains a member of the EU but also once it has left. 13.6 Whilst it is clear that important questions remain about the sustainability of the EU-Turkey Statement and the way in which it is being implemented, as well as the impact of high levels of irregular migration and secondary movements between Member States on the functioning of the Schengen free movement area, we recognise that the Government’s ability to influence developments in an area of policy in which the UK, even while it remains in the EU, does not participate fully is likely to be diminished in light of the UK’s decision to leave the EU. The Committee also reminds the Minister that he has yet to provide information on the Government’s response to recommendations made by the UK’s Anti-Slavery Commissioner (Kevin Hyland), following his visits to hotspots in Greece and Italy earlier this year, to ensure appropriate protection for the most vulnerable migrants (especially unaccompanied children) and to reduce the risk of further trafficking and disappearances. It asks the Minister as a matter of urgency, to explain which recommendations the Government intends to take forward and which, if any, it intends to reject; and indicate how much resource the UK intends to dedicate to implementing the Commissioner’s recommendations and the timescale envisaged. The Committee has completed its scrutiny on this document but will draw it to the attention of the Home Affairs Committee and the Committee on Exiting the EU.

07-11-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre, <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> “We can help you” •Tiers 2 and 5 of the points-based system: sponsorship – priority service, Home Office, 2 November 2016: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ervice-v1_0.pdf</noindex> Although the priority service was announced a couple of months ago by the Home Office as an alternative to A rated sponsors paying £25,000 for the premium service. The guidance doesn’t say how much the new priority service will be or how sponsors will pay. The priority service will only allow A rated sponsors to request the following on an expedited basis: • change authorisation officer; • add a new level 1 user; • add or renew the allocation of certificates of sponsorship •Chapter 60 Enforcement Instructions and Guidance: Judicial Reviews and Injunctions updated by Home Office 31 October 2016 Guidance link: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...pter60_v_13.pdf</noindex> The new version of Chapter 60 of the Enforcement Instructions and Guidance was published by the Home Office on Monday, 31 October 2016. Issuing a claim for judicial review will not act as a barrier to removal in certain cases and an injunction will be needed – see section 6. The amended guidance also extends the use of limited notice of removal – see section 2.3. •Home Office response to Committee's query on ‘Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2016’ (04 November 2016) The Joint Select Committee on Statutory Instruments' twelfth report contains the following memorandum from the Home Office: <noindex>http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/j...idTextAnchor047</noindex> •Lords Parliamentary Debate on Brexit: Impact on Universities and Scientific Research (03 November 2016) Moved by Lord Soley: That this House takes note of the potential impact of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union on funding for universities and scientific research. <noindex>https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2016-11...entificResearch</noindex> •(No. 1060) Immigration (Residential Accommodation) (Termination of Residential Tenancy Agreements) (Guidance etc.) Regulations 2016 No. 1060 laid before Parliament (04 November 2016) This statutory instrument is subject to negative resolution and was •made on the 2nd November 2016 •laid before Parliament 4th November 2016 •comes into force on 1st December 2016. <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/1060/made/data.pdf</noindex> •Notice of Eviction and End of Tenancy wording Right to Rent, The Immigration (Residential Accommodation) (Termination of Residential Tenancy Agreements) (Guidance etc.) Regulations 2016, 2 November 2016: <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/1060/made</noindex> This prescribes the form of notice that landlords will need to use to end a tenancy and to pursue eviction without a court order under the new right to rent provisions that will be in force from 1st December.

03-11-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre, <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation</noindex>. “We can help you” •According to the UK BA, from next week the UK BA letter accompanying permanent residence documentation will confirm the date on which the applicant is deemed to have acquired permanent residence, based on the information provided with their application. The UK BA is also amending the EEA (PR) guidance notes to make it clear that applicants applying for permanent residence documentation can provide evidence for historical periods of qualifying residence. The new version of the guidance notes will be published shortly •Settlement visa applications submitted in Russia - change to guidance, UK Visas and Immigration, October 2016 UPDATED 2 November 2016. In brief: supporting documents for applications should now be sent to Sheffield : <noindex>https://static.tlscontact.com/media/ru/mow/uk/settle_en.pdf</noindex> •High Court ruling on Article 50: UK Government cannot withdraw from the EU without the involvement of Parliament (03 November 2016) R (Miller) -V- Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin) Case No. CO/3809/2016 and CO/3281/2016 Today the High Court has ruled that the Government cannot withdraw from the EU without the involvement of Parliament. The Government is expected to appeal the decision. Summary: <noindex>https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/upl...eu-20161103.pdf</noindex> Judgment: <noindex>https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/upl...eu-20161103.pdf</noindex> The Question The issue before the court is whether, as a matter of UK constitutional law, the Government is entitled to give notice of a decision to leave the European Union under Article 50 by exercise of the Crown’s prerogative powers and without reference to Parliament. This is a pure question of law. The court is not concerned with and does not express any views about the merits of leaving the European union: this is a political issue. Conclusion The Court holds that the Secretary of State does not have power under the Crown’s prerogative to give notice pursuant to Article 50 for the United Kingdom to withdraw from the European Union. •Written Statement in Parliament: Safeguarding of unaccompanied asylum-seeking and refugee children (01 November 2016), Safeguarding Written statement - HCWS232, Made by: Edward Timpson (The Minister of State for Vulnerable Children and Families) •New EEA Regulations published, 3 November 2016 The Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016, SI 2016/1052 Link: <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/1052/contents/made</noindex> The Government has today published new EEA regulations. Regulation 1(2) states when these will come into force: 1(2) These Regulations come into force— (a) for the purposes of this regulation, regulation 44 and Schedule 5 (transitory provisions), on 25th November 2016; ( for all other purposes, on 1st February 2017. <noindex>http://www.parliament.uk/business/publicat...6-11-01/HCWS232</noindex> •Updated Detention Services Order: Care and management of pregnant women in detention <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...en-in-detention</noindex> The Home Office has issued a final and updated version of Detention Services Order DSO 05/2016 on the care and management of pregnant women in detention, published 01 November 2016. It replaces DSO 02/2013 on pregnant women and supplements DSO 06/2016 on women in the detention estate. The Detention Services Order had been issued in draft after the limitation on the detention of pregnant women under section 60 of the Immigration Act 2016 came into force. It was implemented on an interim basis whilst the Home Office consulted on its text ILPA submitted comments on the draft DSO on 11 August 2016. •New UKVI guidance: arranging removals for officers dealing with immigration enforcement matters within the UK (03 November 2016) This is guidance for Immigration Enforcement officers on how to prepare and arrange for a single person or a family group to be removed from the UK. It also contains information on decisions to separate family members as a consequence of detention or removal. <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...rns-preparation</noindex> •Work and Pensions Committee, House of Commons Select Committee inquiry into Department for Work and Pensions' policies and processes in relation to recognised victims of modern slavery and to assess potential changes in policy after Brexit, 1 November 2016: <noindex>https://www.parliament.uk/business/committe...-slavery-16-17/</noindex>

Визы заменили пластиком уже как пару лет. По другим категориям - уже более 5 лет. Но не всем. Граждане EU получают голубой картон с вклеенной визой.

Приветствую, Оригинал NIN не нужно посылать в любом случае.

Заявления из России на визу жен/невесты/партрера теперь нужно посылать в UK Ссылка на перовоисточник: <noindex>https://static.tlscontact.com/media/ru/mow/uk/settle_en.pdf</noindex> Такая практика уже существует несколько лет для граждан США, Канады и т.п. Теперь пришла очередь граждан России. Если есть вопросы, я на связи: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex>

Дайте знать, как все пройдет.

Trinity College - 10 минут собеседование и стоит 150 ф. Сдается на "ура" и всего 10 мин. Life in the UK: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/life-in-the-uk-test/book-life-in-uk-test</noindex> - есть во всех больших городах

Возможно, кому-то пригодится. Текущая версия EEA Regulations со всми изменениями и т.п. : <noindex>http://www.eearegulations.co.uk/</noindex>

Нужно. Обычно переводчик может в своей декларации упомянуть о том, что в верси А и версии Б фамилии могут писаться (разные страны) немного по разному. Я так делал в свое время, когда заверял переводы документов моих клиентов (я имею уровень MCIL и могу заверять переводы с/на UA-RUS-ENG).

Из недавнего: - Клиентка с Украины, однополый брак (civil partners), рассмотрели и получили визу за 2 дня (использовали ускоренный вариант) - Клиент из России, категория Sole Representative. Сначала подавал сам - получил отказ. Обратился ко мне, я помог правильно и грамотно составить заявление. Рассмотрели и выдали визу за 2.5 недели

01-11-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre, <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> “We can help you” •Commons Select Scottish Affairs Committee publishes the UK Government’s response to the post-study work schemes report (28 October 2016) Chair of the Committee, Pete Wishart expressed disappointment that vocal support from representatives of academia, business, industry, trade unions and the Scottish Government had had no noticeable impact on the direction of policy. The Committee's report highlighted the negative impact of the closure of the Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) visa in 2012, making Scotland less attractive for overseas students and removing employers' easy access to a pool of highly-skilled workers. The Committee set out a number of ways in which the UK Government could improve post-study work options for international students attending Scottish universities, and recommended that the Migration Advisory Commission review the current route for skilled non-EU students to stay in the UK to work for a set period of time. <noindex>http://www.parliament.uk/business/committe...response-16-17/</noindex> •New Home Office guidance published on 'partnership working’ with police or other agencies (27 October 2016) The new ‘partnership working’ guidance (first published 27th October 2016) instructs Immigration Enforcement in the procedures for working with the police or other agencies. With regard to working with other agencies, it details procedures for ‘common multi-agency visit types’, namely · Licensing Act visits · ‘Beds in sheds’ (this term relates to property owners using the outbuildings of residential properties as dwellings, in contravention of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Housing Act 2004) · Trading Standards visits · HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) · Street homelessness operations It emphasizes · the need to establish the legal basis for the Immigration Compliance and Enforcement team to enter premises and details the powers of entry available. · the misconception that Home Office staff can enter premises under section 179 of the Licensing Act 2003 as ’authorised persons’ (page 11). · In partner work there must be no ambiguity as to who is the lead agency for the operation (page 8). · any situation likely to attract media attention must be brought to the attention of the deputy director and press office (page 8). <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...workingv1.0.pdf</noindex> •Britain's Immigration Offer to Europe: How could a preferential system work? British Future, 31 October 2016: <noindex>http://www.britishfuture.org/publication/b...ffer-to-europe/</noindex> British Future has published its report with its proposals for immigration post Brexit. British Future proposes a three-tiered system where ‘highly-skilled’ EU migrants retain their rights to free movement. The first tier would comprise a route that would enable the ‘brightest and best’ (as usual, no definition of ‘best’; as usual seems from context to mean richest) from any country to move to the UK. The second tier would consist of a reciprocal free movement route with an income or a skills threshold. The third tier is also a preferential system and would comprise sector-based quotas to fill low-skilled and semi-skilled jobs. Here EU nationals would be offered preferential access to set quotas of jobs. This appears to be a report that accepts, rather than challenges, post-Brexit discourse on migration. Nor does it challenge the notion that EU migrants should enjoy preferential treatment post-Brexit (as opposed to give primacy to other groups such as Commonwealth citizens or family members of British citizen). The report makes no mention of the evidence submitted to British Future or of the advisory committee for the report. It thus makes no claims to representing consensus but is rather the proposal from British Future. British Future has the advantage over others of having got its report out first and this may affect the extent to which it influences the debate. It has gone for a ‘whole systems’ approach in the report but this is not necessarily how its proposals will be received: experience suggests governments rarely adopt such reports lock stock and barrel but rather pick and choose from them. •The Immigration Act 2016 (Commencement No.2 and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2016 The Secretary of State has made a second commencement order bringing into force further provisions of the Immigration Act 2016: Gov.uk link: <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/10...20161037_en.pdf</noindex> HEADLINES: The appeals provisions under sections 63 to 65 come into force on 01 December 2016. Section 63 is the ‘remove first appeal later’ provision which provides the power to certify human rights claims not involving asylum or protection issues if it would not breach the applicant’s human rights to do so, with the effect that the appeal may only be brought from outside the UK. The power to cancel 3C leave under section 62 also comes into force on 01 December 2016. This applies where an individual has failed to comply with a condition of their leave or used deception in seeking leave to remain. The new residential tenancy provisions under sections 39-41 come into force in England on 01 December 2016. These include the criminal offence of leasing premises to a person disqualified from renting and the new eviction powers. Further illegal working provisions come into force on 01 December 2016 also. These are the provisions related to private hire vehicles and to illegal working closure notices and compliance orders. Transitional provision is made in respect of these provisions so that those granted temporary admission or released from detention by an immigration officer do not commit an offence if they have permission to work while the immigration bail provisions are not yet in force. Section 54 and Schedule 8 come into force on 01 December 2016 date bringing into force provisions that allow for multiple entry search warrants except in Scotland where these are not permitted. Sections 77 to 84 (language requirements for public sector workers) come into force on 21 November 2016. These are all the provisions relating to the duty on public sector authorities to ensure that public sector workers in customer-facing roles within the UK have a command of spoken English (or in Wales, English or Welsh) to enable the effective performance of their role. The provisions on labour market enforcement undertakings, orders and supplementary provisions will all come into force on 25 November 2016. These provisions are aimed at tackling breaches of labour market legislation. The Government considered that the existing system of fines were not sufficient to deal with the kinds of serious or repeated offences seen so it has introduced provisions that work like an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) for employers. Once these provisions are in force, the whole chapter of Part 1 on the labour market will be in force. Section 25 which places a duty on the Secretary of State to issue a code of practice giving guidance to enforcing authorities about the exercise of their functions under sections 14 to 23 was brought into force on 12 July 2016, along with the provisions on the Director of Labour Market Enforcement and the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, when the first commencement order made. •Transparency data: Country returns guide, UK Visas and Immigration, 31 October 2016: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...y-returns-guide</noindex> - Guidance on returning immigration offenders to their country of origin. Recent case-law •MST and Others (national service – risk categories) Eritrea CG [2016] UKUT 00443 (IAC) Tribunals Service link: <noindex>https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/u...c/2016-ukut-443</noindex> The judgment in the above country guidance case on Eritrea has now been re-promulgated and published on the Tribunals Service website. The judgment refers to Upper Tribunal Judge HH Storey rather than Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Storey and the following text has been removed from the head note: Legal “Country guidance” is an established term denoting judicial guidance and adoption by the Home Office of terminology apt to confuse this important fact is to be deprecated. Otherwise, the text of the judgment is the same as that published on 10 October 2016. New country guidance on Eritrea MST and Others (national service – risk categories) Eritrea CG [2016] UKUT 00443 (IAC) 1. Although reconfirming parts of the country guidance given in MA (Draft evaders – illegal departures – risk) Eritrea CG [2007] UKAIT 00059 and MO (illegal exit – risk on return) Eritrea CG [2011] UKUT 00190 (IAC), this case replaces that with the following: 2. The Eritrean system of military/national service remains indefinite and since 2012 has expanded to include a people’s militia programme, which although not part of national service, constitutes military service. 3. The age limits for national service are likely to remain the same as stated in MO, namely 54 for men and 47 for women except that for children the limit is now likely to be 5 save for adolescents in the context of family reunification. For peoples’ militia the age limits are likely to be 60 for women and 70 for men. 4. The categories of lawful exit have not significantly changed since MO and are likely to be as follows: (i) Men aged over 54 (ii) Women aged over 47 (iii) Children aged under five (with some scope for adolescents in family reunification cases (iv) People exempt from national service on medical grounds (v) People travelling abroad for medical treatment (vi) People travelling abroad for studies or for a conference (vii) Business and sportsmen (viii) Former freedom fighters (Tegadelti) and their family members (ix) Authority representatives in leading positions and their family members 5. It continues to be the case (as in MO) that most Eritreans who have left Eritrea since 1991 have done so illegally. However, since there are viable, albeit still limited, categories of lawful exit especially for those of draft age for national service, the position remains as it was in MO, namely that a person whose asylum claim has not been found credible cannot be assumed to have left illegally. The position also remains nonetheless (as in MO) that if such a person is found to have left Eritrea on or after August/September 2008, it may be that inferences can be drawn from their health history or level of education or their skills profile as to whether legal exit on their part was feasible, provided that such inferences can be drawn in the light of adverse credibility findings. For these purposes a lengthy period performing national service is likely to enhance a person’s skill profile. 6. It remains the case (as in MO) that failed asylum seekers as such are not at risk of persecution or serious harm on return. 7. Notwithstanding that the round-ups (giffas) of suspected evaders/deserters, the “shoot to kill” policy and the targeting of relatives of evaders and deserters are now significantly less likely occurrences, it remains the case, subject to three limited exceptions set out in (iii) below, that if a person of or approaching draft age will be perceived on return as a draft evader or deserter, he or she will face a real risk of persecution, serious harm or ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 or 4 of the ECHR. (i) A person who is likely to be perceived as a deserter/evader will not be able to avoid exposure to such real risk merely by showing they have paid (or are willing to pay) the diaspora tax and/have signed (or are willing to sign) the letter of regret. (ii) Even if such a person may avoid punishment in the form of detention and ill-treatment it is likely that he or she will be assigned to perform (further) national service, which, is likely to amount to treatment contrary to Articles 3 and 4 of the ECHR unless he or she falls within one or more of the three limited exceptions set out immediately below in (iii). (iii) It remains the case (as in MO) that there are persons likely not to face a real risk of persecution or serious harm notwithstanding that they will be perceived on return as draft evaders and deserters, namely: (1) persons whom the regime’s military and political leadership perceives as having given them valuable service (either in Eritrea or abroad); (2) persons who are trusted family members of, or are themselves part of, the regime’s military or political leadership. A further possible exception, requiring a more case specific analysis is (3) persons (and their children born afterwards) who fled (what later became the territory of) Eritrea during the War of Independence. 8. Notwithstanding that many Eritreans are effectively reservists having been discharged/released from national service and unlikely to face recall, it remains unlikely that they will have received or be able to receive official confirmation of completion of national service. Thus it remains the case, as in MO that “(iv) The general position adopted in MA, that a person of or approaching draft and not medically unfit who is accepted as having left Eritrea illegally is reasonably likely to be regarded with serious hostility on return, is reconfirmed, subject to limited exceptions…” 9. A person liable to perform service in the people’s militia and who is assessed to have left Eritrea illegally, is not likely on return to face a real risk of persecution or serious harm. 10. Accordingly, a person whose asylum claim has not been found credible, but who is able to satisfy a decision-maker (i) that he or she left illegally, and (ii) that he or she is of or approaching draft age, is likely to be perceived on return as a draft evader or deserter from national service and as a result face a real risk of persecution or serious harm. 11. While likely to be a rare case, it is possible that a person who has exited lawfully may on forcible return face having to resume or commence national service. In such a case there is a real risk of persecution or serious harm by virtue of such service constituting forced labour contrary to Article 4(2) and Article 3 of the ECHR. 12. Where it is specified above that there is a real risk of persecution in the context of performance of military/national service, it is highly likely that it will be persecution for a Convention reason based on imputed political opinion. •Asylum support rates challenges: R (Ghulam & Ors) v SSHD [2016] EWHC 2639 (Admin) (24 October 2016) Ghulam & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2016] EWHC 2639 (Admin) (24 October 2016) <noindex>http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2016/2639.html</noindex> Judgment of Flaux, J in the High Court dismissing three conjoined judicial review challenges to decisions of the Secretary of State setting asylum support rates. These included the reviews of asylum support rates for single adults in August 2014 and April 2015 following the Refugee Action case and the review of asylum support rates for families with children in July 2015 which led to a significant cut in the level of support to families. The applicants were a single adult, a lone mother with three children and a mother with a disabled child, with the Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening.

Не автоматически. Принимается обычно BA/BSC, MA/MSC, PHD. Какой точно диплом Вы получили ?

25-10-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre, <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> “We can help you” •Inquiry into the implications of Brexit for the Crown Dependencies, Justice Committee, House of Commons Select Committee, 21 October 2016: <noindex>http://www.parliament.uk/business/committe...s-launch-16-17/</noindex> The Justice Committee launches an inquiry into the implications of Brexit for the Crown Dependencies (the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man). •Updated Home Office policy on reviewing cases when appeals are lodged. The current UK Visas and Immigration guidance for how it considers the grounds for appeal and supporting documents of an application: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...al-review-apl07</noindex> •The case is R (on the application of Johnson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 56 The Supreme Court has decided that the historic failure of British nationality law to confer automatic citizenship on a child born out of wedlock was discriminatory, it has continuing consequences which breached a person’s human rights in a discriminatory way and that denying such a person British citizenship now is unlawful should they request it. The fact of the person’s later criminal offending was not relevant because the injustice had occurred at birth. •Brexit: EU Citizens House of Lords Question asked by Lord Dubs: "To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assurances they can give to European Union citizens living in the United Kingdom, and British citizens living in other European Union countries, regarding their position following the negotiations for the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union." <noindex>https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2016-10...rexitEUCitizens</noindex> •Migration Advisory Committee: annual report, 2015 to 2016, 25 October 2016: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...rt-2015-to-2016</noindex>

Отличные новости, поздравляю.

Приветсвую, Похоже Вы не правильно трактовали требования Financial Appendix. У мне на прошлой неделе было уже 2 консультации с клиентами с форума по подобной проблеме. Если UK BA прав -выбор у Вас не большой. Я на связи, если хотите детально разобраться, что можно сделать в Вашей ситуации: <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html</noindex>

22-10-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre, <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> “We can help you” •R (on the application of Johnson) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) – UKSC 2016/0042 - Supreme Court Article 8 child of unmarried parents case - 19th October 2016 Mr Johnson, the appellant, was born in Jamaica in 1985 and moved to the UK aged four. His parents were not married. His father was a British citizen but his mother was not. Under the laws then in force he did not acquire British citizenship at birth. He obtained indefinite leave to remain in the UK in 1992 but he did not apply for permanent citizenship, despite a scheme which had been in place since 1987 that would have allowed him to do so on proof of paternity. In 2006 the law was changed to accord citizenship to illegitimate children with at least one British parent but the change in the law was not retrospective and Mr Johnson could not take advantage of it. In 2008 Mr Johnson was convicted of manslaughter. The Secretary of State for the Home Department, the respondent, issued a deportation order, which Mr Johnson challenged. The High Court found in favour of Mr Johnson. The Secretary of State appealed and the Court of Appeal set aside the High Court’s decision. This appeal considered the circumstances in which the Human Rights Act 1998 can be applied to causative events which occurred prior to its coming into force, but which are alleged to have continuing effect and whether a declaration of incompatibility with the ECHR can, and should be made, in respect of historic legislation (since repealed) which denied automatic British citizenship to illegitimate children with a British father and a non-British mother. The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal, finding that Mr Johnson’s liability to deportation by reason of the accident of his birth outside wedlock is unlawfully discriminatory, in breach of his Convention rights. The consequence is that the certificate granted by the Secretary of State will be quashed and Mr Johnson’s appeal against the decision to deport him will be certain to succeed. The court also makes a declaration that the statutory requirement that a person in Mr Johnson’s position must also be of good character in order to be granted British citizenship is incompatible with Convention rights, pursuant to section 4 HRA. Judgment: <noindex>https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc...42-judgment.pdf</noindex> •Guidance: Litigation debt, UK Visas and Immigration, 20 October 2016: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/litigation-debt</noindex> The Home Office has issued new guidance on what the Home Office should do when an applicant for entry clearance, leave to enter or leave to remain owes a litigation debt to the Home Office. Litigation debt is a debt owed to the Home Office where the court or Tribunal has ordered another party to pay its legal costs. A power to refuse applications for entry clearance, leave to enter or leave to remain on the basis of litigation debt was added to the Immigration Rules and applies to applications made on or after 6 April 2016. The rule may not be applied to any applications made before 6 April 2016. The guidance does not apply to protection claims, claims of EEA nationals and their family members who apply under EEA regulations or nationality cases. The document contains guidance on exercising discretion in an application before taking any decision to refuse, relevant factors to consider and evidence that may be requested. •Guidance: Appeal review: APL07, UK Visas and Immigration, 17 October 2016: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...al-review-apl07</noindex> UK Visas and Immigration guidance for how it considers the grounds for appeal and supporting documents of an application. •Guidance: Unaccompanied asylum seeking children and leaving care: funding instructions, UK Visas and Immigration, 19 October 2016: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...nt-instructions</noindex> Instructions to local authorities about funding for the support and care of former and unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC). •Urgent Question & Answer in Parliament: Child Refugee Age Checks Today Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con) asked the Urgent Question: To ask the Minister for Immigration if he will make a statement on what age checks are being carried out on child refugees to ensure they are children. The House of Commons Answer and ensuing debate is available here: <noindex>https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2016-...fugeesAgeChecks</noindex> The House of Lords repeated Answer and ensuing debate is here: <noindex>https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2016-10...fugeesAgeChecks</noindex>

18-10-2016 UK & EEA Immigration Law Updates from the Legal Centre, <noindex>https://legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html</noindex> “We can help you” •New reports from the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, 13 October 2016: <noindex>http://icinspector.independent.gov.uk/2016...shes-5-reports/</noindex> Including: - An inspection of Border Force operations at Coventry and Langley postal hubs March to July 2016 - A re-inspection of the handling of Tier 4 sponsor licence compliance July 2016 An inspection of the 'hostile environment' measures relating to driving licences and bank accounts January to July 2016 •JCWI plans to bring a judicial review to challenge the government’s decision to raise fees in the Immigration & Asylum Tribunal by around 500%. Fees for paper applications have increased from £80 to £490, and for appeal hearings they have increased from £140 to £800. An urgent £5,000-£10,000 crowd funding campaign has been launched so that the charity can bring this legal challenge. A minimum of £5,000 is needed in order to be able to proceed and to meet the costs risk. JCWI is not a large charity and it does not have the funds to take on the risk alone. It has instructed Liberty to act as its solicitors, and counsel instructed are Laura Dubinsky of Doughty Street, led by Karon Monaghan QC of Matrix. You can contribute here: <noindex>https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/immigrati...fees-challenge/</noindex> •Brexit is causing significant delays in the processing of EU free movement documentation applications. In normal times, before the Brexit vote on 23 June 2016, an EU national could expect a permanent residence certificate to be issued in about 6 weeks and a family member about 4 months or so. Now it is taking the UK BA some 6 months for the non-EEA nationals and some 5 months for the EEA nationals to be issued with Permanent Residence status. The current policy on expediting the UK BA applications under the EEA law can be found on pages 37-38 here: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...on-applications</noindex>

+1........... Это единственный формальный сайт для подачи заявлений на въезд (Entry Clearance/EEA Family Permit и т.п.) в UK - visa4uk.fco.gov.uk

Пожалуйста. Рад был помочь.

Пожалуйста. На прошлой неделе подал и получил с несколькими клиентами (все - семейные) <noindex>ILR в личном визите в нашем местно PEO</noindex>. Категории T2G, T1G и SETM. У двоих были "дети" старше 18 лет.

А как ребенок заявлялся во время получения такого бенефита ? Вы лучше уточните все в первоисточнике, т.е. DWP через их help line. С одной стороны - это их ответственность принимать решения. С другой стороны, DWP принимают решение на основании ЗАЯВЛЕНЫХ данных. Аккуратнее в бенефитами v прендоставленная информация. P.S. Хотя я не помню ни одного отказа за бенефиты.

Приветствую, Так как Ваша дочь въехала с Вами до 18 лет, она остается dependent при условии, что она не создала свою семью, выехала от Вас и дивет и работает независимо (учеба в коледже и проживание в другом городе - ОК, но должны быть четкая финансовая зависимость).