British Lawyer

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из России получил ПМЖ (ILR - Indefinite Leave to Remain; заявление SET(M)) как муж британской гражданки. Заявление было не простое. Объем заявления составил около 500 отсканированных страниц документов. Legal Centre помогал этому клиенту на всех этапах его иммиграционного пути в Великобританию: - Предварительная консультация: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html - Продление визы супруга британской гражданки: https://legalcentre.org/Suprugi-Spouses.html - Получение ПМЖ (ILR): https://legalcentre.org/PMZh-Settlement-ILR.html Работа на всех этапах проходила по принципу полного сопровождения его заявления. Клиент всегда выбирал ускоренное (24-hour Super Premium Service) рассмотрение заявления в Home Office: https://legalcentre.org/viza-za-1-den.html Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Пожалуйста. Был рад помочь Вам.

Если уровень теста соответствует всем требованиям и языковой центр все еще в соответствующем списке (нужно проверить !) - можно использовать сертификат.

28 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> Asylum backlog continues to rise: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/asylum-and-resettlement-datasets The number of people with pending asylum cases has risen by almost 50% in just the last 12 months, new Home Office figures show. Over 56,000 asylum seekers and their dependants were awaiting an initial decision or further review at the end of 2019, compared to 38,000 at the end of 2018. That represents a 47% increase year on year. The number of people waiting just for an initial decision now stands at over 51,000. That figure has been rising steadily since the beginning of 2015, and has more than tripled over the period. Even more troublingly, 2019 saw a 75% increase in the number of people waiting more than six months for an initial decision. There were 17,000 asylum seekers in that position in December 2018, rising to 29,000 in December 2019. >>> Home Office brags about success of entrepreneur visa it abolished a year ago: https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2020/02/27/media-factsheet-immigration-statistics-february-2020/ Yet another hilarious bit of spin in the Home Office’s “fact sheet” on yesterday’s immigration statistics: "…the UK continues to be a desirable location for the brightest and best around the world… The number of highly skilled visas issued [in 2019] has increased by 7% to 5,664. The majority of these (59%) were to entrepreneurs, coming to start businesses in the UK" It is true that 5,664 Tier 1 visas were issued in the calendar year 2019 (if you include dependants and not just main applicants). Of those, 3,342 (59%) were granted in the Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) category. That’s right: the Home Office is lauding the success of a visa that it abolished in March 2019. Most of the 3,342 Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visas issued in 2019 came after the route closed to new applicants, the result of applications filed before 29 March 2019 still making their way through the system. The direct replacement for Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) was the Innovator visa. It was, by the Home Office’s own admission, designed to reduce the number of overseas entrepreneurs getting UK visas. In that noble aim the department has admirably succeeded: the combined number of entrepreneur-type visa applications has fallen off a cliff after Innovator replaced Entrepreneur. Put another way: in the last quarter of 2018, the Home Office issued 894 Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visas, including dependants. In the last quarter of 2019, it granted just 66 Innovator visas.

Да, примерно так. Но лучше избежать выделенного выше.

Приветствую, Какое точно заявление подаете ? И когда в последний раз и на какое заявление Вы использовали этот тест ?

Я на чеку 24/7/365 :-)

Буквально на днях случилось. Я подготовил и подал заявление на ПМЖ (ILR - SETM) от имени своего клиента из России, используя т.н. 24-hour Super Premium Service. Клиент использовал диплом о высшем образовании из США, который тот же Home Office уже видел 2 (два) раза во время предыдущих заявлений. Неожиданно через несколько часов после подачи заявления я получил Email от сотрудника Home Office, который потребовал дополнительный (UK NARIC, для тех кто понимает) документ, подтверждающий что в США обучение было на ...английском языке ! Я в срочном порядке связался с менеджером этого сотрудника из Home Office, и буквально через несколько часов получил вот такой Email с искренними извинениями от менеджера отдела Home Office, занимающимся рассмотрением заявлений на ПМЖ (ILR - SETM). Home Office так же отозвал свое, мягко говоря, необоснованное требование предоставить абсолютно ненужный документ. Я помог этому клиенту и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Home Office приносит глубокие извинения Буквально на днях случилось. Я подготовил и подал заявление на ПМЖ (ILR - SETM) от имени своего клиента из России, используя т.н. 24-hour Super Premium Service. Клиент использовал диплом о высшем образовании из США, который тот же Home Office уже видел 2 (два) раза во время предыдущих заявлений. Неожиданно через несколько часов после подачи заявления я получил Email от сотрудника Home Office, который потребовал дополнительный (UK NARIC, для тех кто понимает) документ, подтверждающий что в США обучение было на ...английском языке ! Я в срочном порядке связался с менеджером этого сотрудника из Home Office, и буквально через несколько часов получил вот такой Email с искренними извинениями от менеджера отдела Home Office, занимающимся рассмотрением заявлений на ПМЖ (ILR - SETM). Home Office так же отозвал свое, мягко говоря, необоснованное требование предоставить абсолютно ненужный документ. Я помог этому клиенту и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

27 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> Adult step-children of EU citizens don’t qualify for family member residence cards: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/191.html Ronnie Latayan came to the UK from the Philippines on a visit visa in 2004 and has been here ever since, through multiple unsuccessful applications for further leave to remain. Now 46, Ms Latayan lives with her mother, a naturalised British citizen with an Irish partner. In Latayan v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 191, the Court of Appeal heard Ms Latayan’s appeal against her latest Home Office refusal. She had applied for an EEA residence card, arguing that she was a dependent of her mother’s partner. Ms Latayan described him as her “stepfather” and said that he sent her money in the Philippines between 1998 and 2004. The Court of Appeal had to decide whether Ms Latayan came under Regulation 7(1)(b)(ii) of the EEA Regulations 2006. To do so, she would have to be a “direct descendant” of her stepfather. Despite her not being his biological or adopted child, counsel for Ms Latayan made the “spirited argument” that a “de facto” or “real-world” parental relationship existed here. But Lord Justice Peter Jackson, giving several reasons, found otherwise: "a step-child of an EU citizen (meaning a child of a person who is in a relationship with an EU citizen, not being a marriage or a civil partnership) is not a direct descendant of the citizen within the meaning of the Regulations. A second ground of appeal was rejected as “no more than a disagreement with the [First-Tier Tribunal’s] assessment of evidence”, and the appeal dismissed. >>> Supreme Court: detention is unlawful if based on unlawful deportation order: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2020/7.html The Supreme Court has found in the case of DN (Rwanda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 7 that the detention of a Rwandan man facing deportation was unlawful because the deportation order on which detention was based was itself unlawful. In this case the deportation order was unlawful because it was made under a piece of secondary legislation which was, unusually, subsequently declared unlawful by the Court of Appeal. DN (Rwanda) has wider application, enabling claims for damages for unlawful detention in other cases where a deportation order was unlawfully made.

26 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> Permission should not be granted on the grounds as pleaded if there is, quite apart from the grounds, a reason why the appeal would fail: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/44.html Another unsuccessful reported appeal to assist the Ukrainian refugee who claimed asylum in the UK years after entering illegally and first travelling through a number of safe EU countries (where that refugee could claim asylum in the first place). This reported case that would perhaps have been more effective and appropriate as a passive-aggressive Post-it note stuck on the office kettle at Tribunal HQ: "Permission should not be granted on the grounds as pleaded if there is, quite apart from the grounds, a reason why the appeal would fail" That’s the whole headnote. All of it. From OK (PTA; alternative findings) Ukraine [2020] UKUT 44 (IAC). Notably the determination is written by one D O’Callaghan, formerly of Landmark Chambers and much missed at the immigration bar, who heard the case alongside President Lane. The determination is sound, naturally, but why on earth was it selected for reporting when so many other more interesting and important cases are not?

Пожалуйста. Я был рад помочь Вам.

24 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> Global Talent Guidance: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjD7NKLiOjnAhUfBGMBHbPbC2IQFjAAegQIBBAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F867038%2FGlobal_Talent_Policy_-_02.20.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2h0ZQJMp2ezEqs11pc6u_k >>> Tier 2 and 5: Guidance for Sponsors. Now contains a whopping 205 pages: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiiz7qniOjnAhXMDWMBHWTrDasQFjAAegQIAxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F842588%2F2019-10-25_Tier-2-5-sponsor-guidance_Oct-2019_v1.0.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0NIq-7b77YbtV-NWHJ7ViN >>> European Economic Area nationals: qualified persons -Guidance: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiqwKvDiOjnAhUR8uAKHZFJC_QQFjACegQIAhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F759064%2Feea-qualified-persons-v6.0ext.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0HbqxqaGbkFj7CXxALs7GN

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще одна клиента Legal Centre из Украины получил ПМЖ (ILR) по категории EU Settled Scheme (EU SS). Legal Centre помогал этой клиентке на следующих этапах ее иммиграционного пути: - Первоначальная консультация для того, чтобы проверить, выполняет ли клиент условия ILR: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html - Подача и получение ПМЖ (ILR) по опции Общего Сопровождения: https://legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Заявление было положительно рассмотрено очень быстро. Я помог ей и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

По Вашей категории отсутствовать можно до 2-х лет. Проблем обычно не бывает. На гражданство могут "простить" отсутствия до 180 дней в последний год в некоторых случаях. Могу обсудить, как всегда, все здесь.

Отличные новости, Были рады помочь Вам :-)

Да, есть такое. Нужно отвечать как требует анкета. Home Office заботится о детях (с).

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

20 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) Court of Appeal lowers the bar for refusing tax discrepancy cases: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/157.html In the case of Tahir Yaseen v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 157, the Court of Appeal has reiterated that refusals on the ground of character or conduct require a balancing exercise, taking into account both positive and negative considerations. The appellant, Mr Yaseen, made an application for indefinite leave to remain on the basis of his ten-year lawful residence in the UK. His application was refused on character grounds, due to a tax issue. There are, however, two main differences between this case and others we have seen so far: - Mr Yaseen did not declare different incomes to HMRC and the Home Office. Rather, he did not submit three years worth of tax returns at all until after he submitted his application for indefinite leave and was called for an interview by the Home Office. - The Home Office refused the application relying not only on paragraph 322(5), but also on paragraph 276B(ii), which applies to indefinite leave to remain on the ground of ten years’ lawful residence in the UK. Paragraph 276B(ii) ended up being the “winning” paragraph from the Home Office point of view. It reads: "276B. The requirements to be met by an applicant for indefinite leave to remain on the ground of long residence… are that: … (ii) having regard to the public interest there are no reasons why it would be undesirable for him to be given indefinite leave to remain on the ground of long residence, taking into account his: … (c) personal history, including character, conduct… Paragraph 322(5) says: Grounds on which leave to remain and variation of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom should normally be refused… (5) the undesirability of permitting the person to remain… in the light of his conduct… character or dissociations… It is difficult to see the difference between the two. But the Court of Appeal agreed with the lower tribunals and the Secretary of State that a refusal under paragraph 322(5) requires a finding of dishonesty, while a refusal under paragraph 276B doesn’t. Similarly, it agreed that the case law on tax discrepancies does not apply to refusals under paragraph 276B. The court found, however, that before a refusal under paragraph 276B can be made, the decision-maker should conduct a balancing exercise taking into account both positive and negative factors relating to the applicant’s character. It decided that the First-tier Tribunal had failed to do so, and therefore remitted the case for the tribunal to reconsider. As mentioned before, it is difficult to follow the logic behind setting two different tests for paragraphs which read so much alike. All it does, it seems, is lower the bar for the Home Office. Officials can now rely on paragraph 276B instead of 322(5), without having to make a finding of dishonesty. People applying under the long residence rules who know there may be issues with their taxes would be well advised to submit “counter” evidence of their good character.

19 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) Important Update: >>> Government introduces a new immigration Points Based System (PBS): https://www.gov.uk/government/news/home-secretary-announces-new-uk-points-based-immigration-system The government has released a few more details of what it calls a “points based system” for immigration to the UK after Brexit. To balance out the impending end of free movement of workers from the European Union, it would allow employers to sponsor migrant workers at lower salaries and skill levels than they can today, but with almost no provision for visas for people working in jobs that do not require A-level qualifications or higher. Today’s proposals are solely to do with economic migration: family migration, asylum and students are unaffected. They are — very optimistically — supposed to come into effect from January 2021. Skilled workers The system would introduce a limited element of flexibility in sponsored work visas (currently branded Tier 2, although the language of “tiers” is virtually absent from the policy paper). Sponsored workers would still need a job offer, English language skills and to be working at a certain skill level. That skill level would be reduced level 6 (degree) to level 3 (A-level), as was the case under the December 2018 white paper. There will still be a minimum salary required for a work visa. The headline salary threshold has been reduced to £25,600, in line with the Migration Advisory Committee’s recent recommendation. But it will no longer be the absolute minimum: some workers earning between £20,480 and £25,600 would still be able to get a visa, but only if they are highly qualified or working in shortage jobs. So in effect, the minimum salary for a UK work visa will be £20,480 for people working in jobs on the Shortage Occupation List or who have PhDs in science, technology, engineering or mathematics. It will be £23,040 for people with a PhD outside these subjects but nevertheless “relevant to the job”. For people with none of these characteristics, the minimum will be the headline £25,600. What of the May-era white paper proposal to scrap the annual cap on these work visas? That does reappear, although the word used is “suspend” rather than “abolish”. The Resident Labour Market Test will also go. The paper adds: "...here will continue to be different arrangements for a small number of occupations where the salary threshold will be based on published pay scales. We will set the requirements for new entrants 30% lower than the rate for experienced workers in any occupation and only use the base salary (and not the allowances or pension contributions) to determine whether the salary threshold is met." Lower-skilled workers There will be no visa route for “lower-skilled” workers. This is a change from the 2018 white paper, which had grudgingly proposed a system of 12-month work visas for people who do not meet the skills threshold outlined above. This would have been “for a transitional period after the UK’s exit from the EU”. The Johnson government no longer considers this necessary. This is primarily an ideological decision: "UK businesses will need to adapt and adjust to the end of free movement, and we will not seek to recreate the outcomes from free movement within the points-based system. As such, it is important that employers move away from a reliance on the UK’s immigration system as an alternative to investment in staff retention, productivity, and wider investment in technology and automation." In the meantime, businesses are told to make do with the existing pool of lower-skilled workers. This includes the millions of existing EU residents who have secured their right to remain post-Brexit under the EU Settlement Scheme. They will “provide employers with flexibility to meet labour market demands”. The paper also says that “we have committed to expanding the pilot scheme for seasonal workers in agriculture which will be quadrupled in size to 10,000 places”. So there will be visas for strawberry pickers, but not for care home workers. Highly skilled workers The Migration Advisory Committee had also said that the Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) visa could be made points-based. Unsurprisingly, since the government introduced unrelated reforms to Exceptional Talent just days later, this recommendation is not followed. Instead, the paper proposes adding a new “unsponsored route” for the highly skilled alongside Exceptional Talent, with eligibility determined by personal characteristics. "Example characteristics for which points could be awarded include academic qualifications, age and relevant work experience." This would be much more Australia-style. But in light of past experience — the MAC pointed out that the Home Office itself had come to loathe points-based visas like Tier 1 (General) — the paper says that “this route will take longer to implement”. It adds that “we want to learn from previous experience of similar schemes in the UK that have highlighted certain challenges. The scheme will need to be designed to make sure it adds value and does not undermine the skilled worker route or create opportunities for abuse”. It may be doubted whether it will ever come to pass. What next? The most telling line of this paper is that “The Home Office will publish further detail on the points-based system in due course”. Further detail is practically overdue already: these broad brush strokes must now be translated into detailed Immigration Rules and procedures in time for January 2021. The Rules themselves are due for a general rewrite in line with Law Commission recommendations; the policy paper says that the government will be responding to these recommendations “shortly”.

19 February 2020 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber) >>> EU citizens’ rights during the Brexit transition period: https://publiclawproject.org.uk/latest/eu-citizens-rights-during-the-transition-period/ The Public Law Project has a new briefing on EU citizens’ rights during the transition period. It says: "The main takeaway is that throughout the transition period, until 31 December 2020, almost all EU rules will continue to apply in the UK. The jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union will continue until the end of the transition period. The four freedom: the freedoms of movement, services, capital and goods will continue until the end of the transition period. This means the UK will remain part of the customs union and [single] market until 31 December 2020 and British citizens will continue to be able to move freely around the EU and vice versa. More importantly EU nationals and their family members in the UK throughout the transition period should not be asked for proof of settled or pre-settled status to access healthcare, to rent property or to gain employment until 1 January 2021. An EU, EEA or Swiss passport or national identity card, or a residence card issued by the Home Office if someone is the family member of an EU, EEA or Swiss citizen, is sufficient to show that someone is lawfully in the UK and lawfully entitled to work and rent property until the end of the transition period.". The Brexit transition period ends on 31 December 2020, unless extended by mutual agreement.

Приветствую, Получение британского гражданства "аннулирует" Ваш PR. Вам скажут то, что Вы сами написали выше.

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Legal Centre помогает клиентам из разных стран в самых сложных ситуациях: - Отказы - Аннулирование виз - Суды и т.п. Очередной клиент Legal Centre получил визу по принципу "рассмотрение заявления за 24 часа". Наша фирма помогала этому клиенту на следующих этапах его иммиграционного пути: - Первоначальная консультация для того, чтобы проверить, выполняет ли клиент условия ILR: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html - Общее сопровождение: https://legalcentre.org/Obshee-soprovozdenie.html Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Каждый день приносит хорошие новости клиентам Legal Centre © Сегодня еще один клиент Legal Centre из США получил ПМЖ (ILR) по категории Tier 2 (General). Legal Centre помогал этому клиенту на следующих этапах его иммиграционного пути: - Первоначальная консультация для того, чтобы проверить, выполняет ли клиент условия ILR: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html - Подача и получение ПМЖ (ILR): https://legalcentre.org/PMZh-Settlement-ILR.html Заявление подавалось по т.н. 24-hour Super Premium Servie в 09.30 и было положительно рассмотрено через несколько часов в тот же день. Я помог ему и могу помочь Вам. Вы можете записаться на предварительную телефонную/online консультацию со мной, Антоном Ковалем, 24 часа в сутки: https://legalcentre.org/Konsultacija-s-Advokatom.html Антон Коваль Legal Centre +44(0)7791145923 (Mob/WhatsApp/Viber) +44(0)3300010342 (Office) www.legalcentre.org

Приветствую, Зависит от времени, проведенного за рубежем. Нескольким клиенткам продлял визы вместо того, чтобы получить ПМЖ - у них были долгие отсутствия.