Важные судебные решения и новости для иммигрантов

[British Lawyer]

17 July 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Dependency assumed for parents with EU Settlement Scheme family permits: https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2023-ukut-00161

A ‘dependent parent’ already admitted under the EU Settlement Scheme can get leave to remain without having to show dependency, the Upper Tribunal has held in Rexhaj (extended family members: assumed dependency) [2023] UKUT 00161 (IAC).

If applying before 30 June 2021, the parent of an EU national or of their spouse could obtain entry clearance as a ‘dependent parent’ without actually needing to prove they were dependent. Appendix EU (Family Permit) to the Immigration Rules said dependency would just be assumed. A parent who wants to stay longer than six months then needs to apply for leave to remain under Appendix EU. That Appendix does require dependency to be proven, unless the person has previously been ‘granted limited leave to enter or remain under this Appendix as a dependent parent’.

Ms Rexhaj was in this situation. The Home Office and First-tier Tribunal told her she needed to show dependency, because her leave to enter had been granted under Appendix EU (Family Permit), not under Appendix EU.

She appealed, and the Upper Tribunal concluded this was wrong. Its reasoning turned on the legal distinction between entry clearance (a visa granted before travel) and leave to enter (permission to enter the UK granted by an immigration officer on arrival). On a proper reading, Appendix EU (Family Permit) only governs entry clearance. Leave to enter is granted at the border under Appendix EU. Someone like Ms Rexhaj, therefore, has leave ‘under this Appendix’ and qualifies for an extension without needing to show dependency.

As the UT commented, the post-Brexit rules ‘do not appear to have been drafted with future (or even present) clarity in mind’. Ms Rexhaj won’t be the only person wrongly told to prove dependency after not having to do so in her first application. This decision provides welcome clarification.

[British Lawyer]

19 July 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules: HC 1715 (19 July 2023) - Changes to the Visa National List: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/statement-of-changes-to-the-immigration-rules-hc-1715-19-july-2023?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=a3eaa531-10e1-4519-afb1-fc3038d5419a&utm_content=immediately

The only changes made in this statement are to Appendix Visitor: 

Visa national list.

The changes came into effect TODAY, 19 July 2023, at 15:00. 
Nationalities Added to the Visa National List

The following nationalities will be added the visa national list at VN 1.1(a) of Appendix Visitor: Visa national list:

- Dominica
- Honduras
- Namibia
- Timor-Leste
- Vanuatu

Transition Period for visitors with pre-booked travel to the UK

As for the general transition period, the Statement of Changes states:

"In relation to those changes, if an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or leave to remain, has been made before 19 July 2023, such applications will be decided in accordance with the Immigration Rules in force on 18 July 2023."

However, there is a provision which will allow nationals of the affected countries who have booked travel to the UK prior to the rules coming into effect to enter as a visitor without a visa for a period of 4 weeks from today.

After VN 2.2(n) of Appendix Visitor: Visa national list, the following paragraph will be inserted:

“(o) nationals or citizens of Dominica, Honduras, Namibia, TimorLeste, and Vanuatu, who hold confirmed bookings to the UK made on or before 15:00 BST 19 July 2023 where arrival in the UK is no later than 16 August 2023.”.

This exception does not apply where the person is: (a) visiting the UK to marry or to form a civil partnership, or to give notice of marriage or civil partnership, unless they are a “relevant national” as defined in section 62 of the Immigration Act 2014; or (b) seeking to visit the UK for more than 6 months.

This transition period is explained in the Explanatory Memorandum as follows:

“7.2 The imposition of these visa regimes will include a transition period for any nationals of these countries who are travelling to the UK without a visa. This period will commence at the same time as the visa regime is imposed and run until four weeks after the imposition date. During this period, those nationals who hold a confirmed booking to the UK made before the exact time of the imposition, and where arrival in the UK is no later than four weeks after the imposition, will be exempt from the visa requirement. Those booking on or after the imposition, or due to arrive in the UK four weeks after the imposition, will require a visa.
 
7.3 This transition period will prevent operational difficulties, general unfairness, and ensure that people who arranged travel before this announcement do not lose money. The length of the period (four weeks) has been chosen to give the nationals of these countries enough time to book and receive a visa. The current service-level agreement for processing times for visit visas is approximately 15 working days. ”.

Airside transit

In relation to airside transit passengers, who “do not need to change airports or pass through the UK border”, the Explanatory Memorandum sets out that:

“7.4 The visa impositions will also be accompanied by amendments to the Immigration (Passenger Transit Visa) Order 2014, to ensure that nationals from these countries will also require a visa when conducting airside transit travel.”

 

[British Lawyer]

20 July 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> British passports will be issued in the name of His Majesty for the first time since 1952: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-passports-will-be-issued-in-the-name-of-his-majesty?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=9c1b93d5-7a03-474f-9a78-3badad78f884&utm_content=immediately

 

[British Lawyer]

26 July 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Upper Tribunal rules post-Brexit Zambrano appeals can continue: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2023/162.html

In a highly technical decision, Osunneye (Zambrano, transitional appeal rights) Nigeria [2023] UKUT 162 (IAC), the Upper Tribunal has concluded that Zambrano appeals may proceed notwithstanding the various Brexit regulations. The official headnote:

"1. Following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 are continued for transitional purposes by statutory instruments including the Immigration and Social Security Coordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 (Consequential, Saving, Transitional and Transitory Provisions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (SI 1309/2020).

2. Paragraph 5 of Schedule 3 to the 2020 Regulations deals with “Existing appeal rights and appeals”. Paragraph 6 of Schedule 3 then sets out the specified provisions of the EEA Regulations 2016. Neither regulation 16 nor 20 of the EEA Regulations are included in that schedule. Regulation 36 relating to appeal rights is. Schedule 2 to the EEA Regulations is also amongst the provisions continued as modified. At paragraph 6(cc), the modifications to that schedule are set out.

3. Those provisions draw a distinction between appeals which arise before or are against decisions taken before 31 December 2020 (paragraphs 5(1)(a) to (c)) and those against decisions taken after 31 December 2020 (paragraph 5(1)(d)).

4. Contrary to the unreported decision in Secretary of State for the Home Department v Oluwayemisi Janet James (UI-2021-000631; EA/05622/2020), the right of appeal against a decision made prior to 31 December 2020 therefore continues in force until finally determined (see in that regard paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 3 to the 2020 Regulations).

5. Part Four of the Withdrawal Agreement is concerned with transitional provisions which apply during the transition or implementation period between the date of the Withdrawal Agreement and 31 December 2020.

6. Part Four of the Withdrawal Agreement applies “Union law” during the transition period. The Zambrano right is a derivative one which depends on Article 20 Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The TFEU is part of “the EU Treaties”. It is continued in force during the transition period.

A decision to the contrary would have come as something of a surprise as it was surely not intended by the Home Office. Notwithstanding the surprising submissions made by a Home Office Presenting Officer and the outcome of a different, unreported appeal."

[British Lawyer]

31 July 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> The Illegal Migration Act 2023: Key points

The commencement provisions are set out at section 68, and it is important to bear in mind that much of the Act is not yet in force. If and when further provisions are brought into force, this will be done via regulations at a later date. The main provisions that came into force with Royal Assent are:

- Sections 30 to 37: Entry, settlement and citizenship
- Section 52: Judges of the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal

Section 30 prohibits a grant of entry clearance, an Electronic Travel Authority or leave to enter or remain to anyone who has arrived in the UK on or after 7 March 2023, and who meets the other three conditions set out in section 2. This is subject to certain exceptions, including for certain unaccompanied children and survivors of trafficking and where there would otherwise be a breach of human rights.

Section 31 defines an “ineligible person” as someone who has arrived since 7 March 2023 and has previously met the Section 2 conditions. This person is prohibited from registering or naturalising as a British Citizen under sections 32 to 37.

An important change since the Bill was published is that all of these provisions are no longer extended to the family members of the affected people. 

 

[British Lawyer]

01 August 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Post-Brexit spouses aren’t protected by the Withdrawal Agreement, Court of Appeal confirms: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/921

If you married an EU national in the UK after 31 December 2020, you can’t get leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme unless you previously had or applied for an EEA residence card or family permit as their durable partner. That remains the case even if you would have got married sooner but for the impact of Covid-19. So held the Court of Appeal in Celik v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 921, agreeing with the Upper Tribunal’s decision last year.

[British Lawyer]

11 August 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Reminder on the Home Office and NHS Surcarge Fees increase

From the Home Office

Visa Fees

We are increasing fees across a range of immigration and nationality routes, including for people coming here to live, work and study, at a time of record high migration numbers.

Specifically, this means increasing the cost of most work and visit visas by 15% and increasing the cost of study visas, certificates of sponsorship, settlement, citizenship, wider entry clearance and leave to remain visas, and priority visas by at least 20%. We are also equalising costs for students and for those using a priority service so people pay the same whether they apply from within the UK or from outside the UK.

It is the government’s policy that those who use and benefit most from the immigration system should contribute towards the cost of operating the system, reducing the burden on the UK taxpayer.

We will lay Regulations in the Autumn when Parliament returns that will amend the fee levels.

....

Immigration Health Surcharge Uplift

We are increasing the rates of the Immigration Health Surcharge, which have remained unchanged for the last three years despite high inflation and wider pressures facing the system.

It is right that people coming to the UK for more than six months, pay their fair share towards the NHS.
Subject to final confirmation and the passage of the necessary legislation, the main rate will increase to £1,035, and the discounted rate for students, their dependents, those on Youth Mobility Schemes and under-18s will increase to £776.

>>> Tripling of fines for those supporting illegal migrants: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tripling-of-fines-for-those-supporting-illegal-migrants?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=3d71ce6a-9333-47a3-8708-486103f62739&utm_content=daily

The civil penalty for employers, which was last increased in 2014, will be raised to up to £45,000 per illegal worker for a first breach from £15,000, and up to £60,000 for repeat breaches from £20,000.

For landlords the fines will increase from £80 per lodger and £1,000 per occupier for a first breach to up to £5,000 per lodger and £10,000 per occupier. Repeat breaches will be up to £10,000 per lodger and £20,000 per occupier, up from £500 and £3,000 respectively. The higher penalties will come in at the start of 2024.

>>> Graduate Route vs Marking Boycott - the Home Office's announcement

From the Home Office:

1. UKVI will consider exercising discretion and will hold Graduate route applications made before the applicant’s results have been received, provided that the results are received within 8 weeks of the application being made.

2.Students who do not know when they will receive their results due to the boycott will be able to apply to extend their permission whilst they wait for their results. They will be exceptionally exempt from meeting the academic progression requirements. Sponsors should include a note on the Conformation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS)that the extension is due to the marking boycott.

This a discretionary arrangement, and not a concessionary policy, and is being communicated in a way that is proportionate to the nature and type of the issue covered. We encourage the sector, including sponsors, to drive the dissemination of this flexibility, as the circumstances are the result of a dispute between institutions and their employees.

[British Lawyer]

18 August 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> New immigration system: what you need to know:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-immigration-system-what-you-need-to-know?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=22176a4b-f86f-4c04-b856-06e4c2ed28c7&utm_content=immediately

>>> Ukraine Family Scheme, Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme (Homes for Ukraine) and Ukraine Extension Scheme visa data: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ukraine-family-scheme-application-data/ukraine-family-scheme-and-ukraine-sponsorship-scheme-homes-for-ukraine-visa-data--2

Total Ukraine Scheme visa applications received: 307,300

Data is as of 15 August 2023 and comprised of:

Ukraine Family Scheme: 101,500
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 205,800

Total Ukraine Scheme visas issued to people: 237,800

Data is as of 15 August 2023 and comprised of:

Ukraine Family Scheme visas: 69,800
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme visas: 168,000

Total arrivals of Ukraine Scheme visa-holders in the UK: 184,400

Data is as of 14 August 2023 and comprised of:

arrivals via Ukraine Family Scheme: 53,800
arrivals via Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 130,500
 

[British Lawyer]

30 August 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Adult Dependent Relatives (ADR) Visas have the highest refusal rate ?

Between 2017 and 2020, 96% of applications were refused.

See https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-11-03/debates/EAAE3C28-2875-45F2-8EC7-A77AF5266230/AdultDependentRelativeVisas

[British Lawyer]

08 September 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Home Office exit checks fact sheet: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exit-checks-on-passengers-leaving-the-uk/exit-checks-fact-sheet?utm_source=Free+Movement&utm_campaign=87c2abee04-Daily+forum+updates&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_792133aa40-87c2abee04-116194677&mc_cid=87c2abee04&mc_eid=1af5cd4d48
 

[British Lawyer]

15 September 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> BRP Delivery - New Service Provider, Royal Mail (15 September 2023)

From the Home Office:

"From Monday 18th September 2023 we will moving from FedEx/TNT to Royal Mail Group for the delivery of biometric residence permits (BRP’s). The service will continue in a similar way to the previous provider, however the key differences are as follows:

A SIGNATURE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED to receive your BRP, this will be posted through the letterbox or mailbox.  In the event that delivery of the BRP is not possible redelivery will need to be arranged or the BRP can be collected from Royal Mail’s local delivery office, details of which will be provided on the ‘Something for you’ card.

Once the BRP has been produced and collected by Royal Mail for delivery YOU WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO CHANGE YOUR DELIVERY ADDRESS, please can you ensure that your address details are kept up-to-date with UKVI"

 

[British Lawyer]

28 September 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Home Office Update on Availability of Super Priority Service for Family & Human Rights Applicants without visas

From the Home Office:

"The Super Priority Service (24-hour same day service) would no longer be available for applicants without valid leave to enter or remain in the UK who are applying for leave on the basis of family or private life on form FLR(FP), or on the basis of human rights or outside the rules on form FLR(HRO).

>>> Expect (long) delays in some types of the UK Visas and Immigration applications

During the ILPA conference this week it was mentioned that the Home Office is struggling to recruit new caseworkers, that they moved the existing caseworkers to their Asylum Unit and that the caseworkers are leaving the Home Office jobs. That is resulting in some applications, such as FLR(FP)/Human Rights/Private Life etc to now have 12+ months consideration time.
 

[British Lawyer]

29 September 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Examples of UK vignettes: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examples-of-uk-visa-vignettes/examples-of-vignettes

>>> Ukraine Family Scheme, Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme (Homes for Ukraine) and Ukraine Extension Scheme visa data: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ukraine-family-scheme-application-data/ukraine-family-scheme-and-ukraine-sponsorship-scheme-homes-for-ukraine-visa-data--2

Total Ukraine Scheme visa applications received: 313,900

Data is as of 26 September 2023 and comprised of:

Ukraine Family Scheme: 103,500
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 210,400

Total Ukraine Scheme visas issued to people: 241,200

Data is as of 26 September 2023 and comprised of:

Ukraine Family Scheme visas: 70,300
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme visas: 170,900

Total arrivals of Ukraine Scheme visa-holders in the UK: 187,900

Data is as of 25 September 2023 and comprised of:

arrivals via Ukraine Family Scheme: 54,500

arrivals via Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 133,400

[British Lawyer]

06 October 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Migration Advisory Committee recommends shortage occupation list is abolished: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-the-shortage-occupation-list-2023

The Migration Advisory Committee has recommended that the shortage occupation list is abolished and that people in the asylum system with permission to work are allowed to work in any role. These are some of the recommendations in the full review of the shortage occupation list, published yesterday.

The future of the shortage occupation list

At the outset of the report, the committee stated that they have carried out the review on the basis that employers should not be able to pay salaries lower than the “going rate”, regardless of whether there is a shortage. The current situation is that where a job is on the shortage occupation list, an employer can pay a migrant 80% of the going rate or of the minimum salary threshold of £26,200 for a skilled worker (i.e, £20,960), whichever is higher.

The committee made the point that there is no good reason why a discounted salary should be paid where an occupation is experiencing shortages. Without that discount, the benefits to being on the shortage occupation list are significantly diminished. The committee considered that the skilled worker route provides an adequate response to the needs of employers without the need for the list.

They pointed out that many employers now have unlimited access to overseas labour as long as the minimum salary of £26,200 for the skilled worker route is met. The committee commented that many employers seemed unaware of this.

The committee had discouraged stakeholders from submitting evidence in relation to higher paid roles, on the basis that inclusion on the shortage occupation list would not help them to use the immigration system more effectively. However submissions were still made, predominantly from government departments, arguing that the visa fee reduction that is available for roles on the shortage occupation list was a more than “negligible benefit”.

>>> Asylum decision making prioritisation: new caseworker guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asylum-decision-making-prioritisation-caseworker-guidance/asylum-decision-making-prioritisation-accessible

'If a claimant (or immigration advisor) needs their asylum claim considered for prioritisation they must contact the asylum decision-making team by email. When contacting the Home Office, they must explain the reason they want to have their claim prioritised and supply relevant evidence. This evidence must be supplied within 10 working days of submitting a request. If evidence is not supplied within this timeframe (without good reason) the request must be declined.'

>>> Homes for Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: caseworker guidance: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1187614/Homes+for+Ukraine+Sponsorship+Scheme.pdf  

Changes to clarify biometric requirements for the scheme.  

Added definition of a legal guardian and application process for accompanied and unaccompanied children under 18. 
Added instructions for decision makers handling cases from applicants who have a temporary legal guardian appointed in Poland.  
Added instructions for decision makers handling duplicate cases. 
Changes to the layout of the guidance for ease of reference, ensuring parity between schemes, updating as required. 
Changes to add instructions on checking all systems for group applications to ensure consistency in handling. 

 
 

[British Lawyer]

18 October 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Is there a cap on the time a student may study in the UK ?

Yes, there is one.

See https://www.ukcisa.org.uk/Information--Advice/Visas-and-Immigration/Student-route-eligibility-and-requirements?q=Progression&ExactMatch=True#layer-3002

[British Lawyer]

19 October 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Court of Appeal gives guidance on sentencing for small boats prosecutions: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2023/1121.html

The Court of Appeal in R v Ginar [2023] EWCA Crim 1121 has given guidance on the appropriate criminal sentences for those convicted for the offence of arriving (or attempting to arrive) in the UK without entry clearance, contrary to section 24(D1) of the Immigration Act 1971. The offence was introduced by the government in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 with the explicit intention of targeting small boats crossing the Channel.

The court said that the custody threshold will ‘generally be crossed’ for people arriving in the UK by small boats, placing migrants and refugees at risk of prison sentences for making the dangerous journey across the Channel. The court has confirmed that the starting sentence for the offence should be 12 months’ imprisonment.

>>> Updated Apply for asylum support: form ASF1 form: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/application-for-asylum-support-form-asf1

As always, the Home Office could not make it better but making the form on the 36 (!) pages long

[British Lawyer]

19 October 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> TLS vs Home Office. Really ?

Yes, really: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2023/2481.html

TLScontact in unsuccessful challenge to new Home Office contract.

It appears that one may start seeing changes in overseas visa processing centres soon, after TLScontact was unsuccessful in an attempt to stop the Home Office from entering into a new contract with VFS Global. The case is Teleperformance Contact Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 2481 (TCC). These proceedings are taking place in the Technology and Construction Court, part of the Business and Property Court of the High Court of Justice.

Background

TLScontact and VFS Global are both companies which manage the administrative side of visa applications for the UK and other countries, taking biometrics (photos and fingerprints) and helping with document checking and uploads as well as providing premium services for faster decisions on some applications.

On 12 July 2023 TLScontact’s parent company Teleperformance Contact Limited lodged a claim challenging the Home Secretary’s decision to award the visa processing contracts for Africa and the Middle East, the Americas, Canada, Australasia and Europe, China and Taiwan to VFS Global’s parent company, VF Worldwide Holding Limited. TLScontact was awarded the contract for services in the UK.

The effect of TLScontact lodging that claim was that the Home Secretary was prevented from entering into the contract with VFS Global under regulation 95(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. That prohibition can be lifted by interim court order. The Home Office applied for such an order and that was the issue to be decided at this hearing.

The hearing and decision

Evidence given on behalf of TLScontact was that the loss of this contract would result in closure of at least 64 of their centres, a 71% reduction in TLScontact revenue, over 750 redundancies and loss of reputation.

The court took issue with some of the evidence provided on behalf of TLScontact, pointing out that no losses could arise from the failure to award them the contract for China and Taiwan as they had no presence in those areas. The evidence also failed to mention the recent awarding to TLScontact of a contract by the Australian government to provide services in Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa, a contract they were taking over from VFS Global. TLScontact accepted that this meant they would maintain business at 10 of the locations.

The court also agreed with VFS Global that winning and losing contracts and opening and closing visa application centres is a route part of business in visa outsourcing, particularly between TLScontact and VFS Global, as the two largest operators.

The Home Office raised concerns that a further delay to their ability to enter into the new contract with VFS Global would result in, or create a very significant risk of a gap in services. TLScontact said that they would agree terms to extend the existing contracts with the Home Office. The court did not accept that this provided enough certainty as the extension would still need to be negotiated.

The court said that another relevant factor was that the new contracts will “include enhanced physical and digital security measures to standards higher than presently required; improved technology, modernisation of delivery of the services improvement to customer experience, and to contract management procedures”. Delays to these improvements would be detrimental to the wider public.

Applying the test from American Cyanamid v Ethicon [1975] AC 396, the court concluded that damages would be an adequate remedy for any loss experienced by TLScontact should it succeed in the substantive claim. It was held that the balance of convenience lay in lifting the stay and allowing the Home Office and VFS Global with the contract.

Conclusion

If the matter now proceeds to a full hearing, the court has indicated that this could take place in February or March 2024. It certainly seems from this decision that TLScontact may run into some evidential issues regarding their losses. Aside from the outcome of this case, hopefully one will see some significant improvements, as referenced above by the court, once the new contracts with VFS Global are underway.

[British Lawyer]

31 October 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT)

Updated detail in the English language test providers in the UK and outside the UK

Briefly, for visa or citizenship applications, you may need to prove your knowledge of English by passing a secure English language test (SELT).

If you are in the UK

You can only take a SELT with one of the following providers:

- IELTS SELT Consortium
- LanguageCert
- Pearson
- Trinity College London

If you are outside of the UK

You can only take a SELT with one of the following providers:

- IELTS SELT Consortium
- LanguageCert
- Pearson
- PSI Services (UK) Ltd – Skills for English (UKVI)

[British Lawyer]

02 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> How is the Home Office prioritising asylum claims?

See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/streamlined-asylum-processing

First, there is no fixed timeframe for an asylum claim to be decided. Getting updates from the Home Office on progress, challenging delay and asking for expedition can often be a fruitless exercise.

The guidance identifies two main groups. The first group comprises people who claimed asylum before certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 were brought into force on 28 June 2022, these are referred to as ‘legacy’ cases. The PM’s commitment to clear the backlog applies only to ‘legacy’ cases.

Who does the guidance apply to?

The process set out in this guidance is separate to the questionnaire being used in the ‘streamlined asylum process’. The guidance also does not apply to asylum claims made by Albanian nationals, as those are being dealt with by a dedicated decision making unit.

The guidance identifies two main groups. The first group comprises people who claimed asylum before certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 were brought into force on 28 June 2022, these are referred to as ‘legacy’ cases. The PM’s commitment to clear the backlog applies only to ‘legacy’ cases.

The second group of cases is those made after that date, referred to as ‘flow’ cases. The newer ‘flow’ claims will not be prioritised until 2024, save in the exceptional circumstances identified below.

Children’s asylum claims should continue to be prioritised and there are two decision making units dedicated to these cases. The guidance recognises that the Home Office must carry out its functions in a way that is compatible with Section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009.

How will cases be decided?

Cases meeting the legacy criteria will be separated into groups using factors including nationality, volume of claims, grant rate, compliance rate and receipt of asylum support.

For some of these groups, a bespoke questionnaire will be issued ahead of an asylum interview. The form can be completed digitally via an online Home Office form or returned via post/email. Repeated failure to return a questionnaire risks a claim being treated as withdrawn. In the first instance this will apply to Iranian and Iraqi claims by adults as this group has the highest number of outstanding claims within the legacy backlog.

Other applicants will be invited to interview unless a decision can be made on the information already available. When a case is suitable this would be a good opportunity to ask for a decision to be made on the papers alone where there is detailed evidence to support the claim and/or where there has already been lengthy delay.

Exceptional case prioritisation

The guidance acknowledges that there are exceptional circumstances outside of the above programmes which will require prioritisation. The guidance provides a non-exhaustive list of cases that can be prioritised:

- cases involving the Hague Convention
- extradition cases
- cases involving deportation of foreign national offenders
- complex or severe physical or mental health cases
- cases of severe vulnerability – examples include but are not limited to severe safeguarding concerns such as where there has been suicidal ideation or torture and this is evidenced by relevant medical evidence, for example a medico-legal report
Requests should be in writing and sent to the main asylum casework team. Evidence must be submitted within ten working days of making the request.

Helpfully, the guidance states that expedition requests must be considered, so anyone seeking prioritisation should push for a written response. In some cases, it might be helpful to request review by a senior caseworker. Any response from the Home Office should include an indicative time frame for a decision. 

Additionally, updates can be requested where six months has passed and the Home Office should respond with a time frame for decision making, as required under paragraph 333A of the immigration rules. The Home Office is however not obliged to comply with the given time frame.

Tips for expediting an asylum claim

Anyone seeking expedition should:

- ensure that the Home Office has their up to date contact details. This should mean that any communication regarding prioritisation is received and avoids the risk of their claim being treated as withdrawn;

- take this opportunity to request a decision on the papers alone where there is detailed evidence such as a medico-legal report;

- take this opportunity to request updates and seek timeframes for decision making.

It is also worth being aware of when the Home Office will consider that there is a barrier to progression of a case. This includes where they are waiting for evidence that will be important to the decision (including medico-legal reports), where there is a pending prosecution, or where there is a “change in country situation requiring an update in country information note leading to a pause in deciding cases from a particular nationality”.

Secondary asylum casework

Interestingly, the guidance also has a section called ‘secondary asylum casework’. This includes cases that have been reinstated after being withdrawn, that were considered under pre-28 June 2022 inadmissibility processes and subsequently admitted to the asylum system, and where a case has been remitted to the decision maker at the review stage of an appeal. These cases will be considered in chronological order unless they meet the above criteria for exceptional case prioritisation.

Where cases have been considered for inadmissibility since 28 June 2022 and then admitted into the asylum system they will be considered in the legacy or flow groups according to the date of application and any other relevant prioritisation criteria set out in the guidance.

[British Lawyer]

03 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Home Office Cover Letter example ?

See https://www.childrenslegalcentre.com/resources/writing-covering-letter-home-office/
 

[British Lawyer]

07 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

07 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT) - Updated list

See https://www.gov.uk/guidance/prove-your-english-language-abilities-with-a-secure-english-language-test-selt?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=5a86a411-31c6-4245-af2c-4f689f677953&utm_content=daily

>>> Permission to work for asylum seekers: Permission to work: caseworker guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/handling-applications-for-permission-to-take-employment-instruction?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=8532c565-6257-4e39-b9a8-ba9c49064fe4&utm_content=daily

Updated casework Guidance

[fregat222]

Прислал мой друг и партнер по иммиграции: "Новый бизнес. Полно таких объявлений в FB в укр группах".

 

Лицензированный консультант по иммиграционному законодательстве Соединенного королевства Великобритании и Северной Ирландии...Кузя. Агентство "Милости простим".

[British Lawyer]

13 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Illegal Migration Act 2023: India and Georgia to be added to the List of 'Safe Countries'

Draft legislation (The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (Amendment of List of Safe States) Regulations 2024) was laid before Parliament yesterday (8 November 2023) that would add India and Georgia to the list of "Safe States" under Section 80AA of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (as amended by section 59 of the Illegal Migration Act 2023). The Regulations must be approved by both Houses of Parliament. If section 2 of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 is commenced, it would mean that Georgian nationals could be returned to Georgia, and Indian nationals to India, with any human rights claim and asylum claim regarding return to those countries declared inadmissible, without the ability to make any serious harm suspensive claim. If the remainder of section 59 of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 is commenced, any human rights claim (that to remove the person from or require them to leave the United Kingdom or to refuse entry into the United Kingdom would be unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998) made by any Georgian or Indian national, even those with lawful status, even those who have never met the conditions in section 2 of the Act, would be inadmissible. 

[British Lawyer]

15 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> UK Supreme Court finds Rwanda is not a safe country to which refugees can be removed: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2023/42

The Supreme Court has today held that Rwanda is not a safe country and that it would be unlawful for refugees to be removed there. The government’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgment has been dismissed.

[British Lawyer]

22 November 2023 – 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)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)

>>> Court of Appeal says deportation of mother of British child not “unduly harsh”

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against the deportation of a mother with a British citizen child, finding that their separation would not be “unduly harsh”. The case is FN (Burundi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 1350.

Background

The appellant is a citizen of Burundi who arrived in the UK on 10 September 2003. In December 2007 she gave birth to a daughter, J, who is a British citizen. In 2009 the appellant was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment for offences including fraudulently claiming benefits. During the 7.5 months she was in prison, J’s father took care of her.

In January 2020 the appellant and J’s father separated and following that J lived with the appellant. The relationship between the appellant and J’s father broke down further following “a domestic incident” in June 2021.

Deportation order and appeal

A deportation order was made in April 2010 and the appeal against that decision was dismissed in September 2010. Representations were then made on human rights and protection grounds. Further representations made in September 2017 were rejected in November 2017 but with a right of appeal as it was accepted that they amounted to a fresh claim. After unnamed “procedural complications” the appeal came before the Upper Tribunal in January 2022 and was dismissed.

It was not in dispute at the Upper Tribunal that the best interests of J would be served by both of her parents remaining in the UK. The tribunal accepted that deportation of the appellant from the UK would be “harsh”, however did not accept that it would be “unduly harsh”. The tribunal’s findings included that J would not suffer physical harm and it was not accepted that J’s father would prevent her from having contact with the appellant.

Permission to appeal was granted on the ground of whether the Upper Tribunal erred in concluding that it would not be “unduly harsh” to deport the appellant. The issues raised were a failure to take account of social services’ concerns, the police involvement, emotional harm and the child’s own views.

The Court of Appeal found that the Upper Tribunal had not erred in concluding that there was no ongoing police involvement, that social services had said they were unable to draw any conclusions as to whether there had been domestic violence. The Court also said that the Upper Tribunal was “not obliged to make a finding as to a “specific level of emotional harm”” and that the child’s own views had been taken into account.

The appeal was dismissed, with the court concluding that “The UT was justified in concluding that the effect of the appellant’s deportation on J would not be “unduly harsh” within the meaning of section 117C(5) of the 2002 Act. That assessment was neither unreasonable nor vitiated by any “identifiable flaw””.

Conclusion

The court reminded itself, with reference to several authorities, that the Upper Tribunal is expert in its jurisdiction and the court should exercise caution when interfering with those decisions. From the details provided in the Court of Appeal’s decision, this seems to have been quite a balanced case and the appellant was arguably unlucky here. It is easy to envisage a different outcome with a different judge at an earlier stage. This is a reminder of how tough these deportation cases can be.