British Lawyer Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2014 Tier 1 Investor: min £2 000 000 investment possibly from Oct/Nov 2014 Данные с конференции между UK BA и иммиграционными юристами, прошедшей недавно. UK BA точно не подтвердили, но формулировка была следующей: "...consensus is that new provisions should be in force in October 2014. A likely political decision to raise the investment required to at least £2m.". Кто не успел тот...как бы странно это не звучало в данной ситуации. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted October 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2014 Граждане Индии и Китая теперь могут въезжать в республику Ирландия по британским визам: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ish-visa-scheme</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted October 15, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2014 Грядущие изменения Правил по гостевым визам: - Draft of the NEW immigration Rules for visitors (October 2014): <noindex>http://www.legalcentre.org/files/VR.pdf</noindex> - Draft visitor guidance (October 2014): <noindex>http://www.legalcentre.org/files/DVG.pdf</noindex> A summary of the main changes to the policy for visitors is below: •a more streamlined set of visitor routes (with fewer visit visa endorsements) which provides clarity and more flexibility for genuine visitors; •rebranding student visitor routes (both the six month and the 11 month English Language routes) into short-term study to make them conceptually clearer for applicants; •allowing permitted paid engagement visitors to also carry out unpaid activities that can be carried out by visitors e.g. attend business meetings and undertake 30 days’ incidental study; •allowing visitors and permitted paid engagement visitors to carry out 30 days’ incidental study (currently only available to general and business visitors); widening out who can provide maintenance and accommodation support to visitors to include any third party in the UK (currently limited to friends and relatives); •consolidating and clarifying existing permitted activities to provide greater flexibility for visitors; and •clarifying the prohibited activities. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted October 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Объявлены изменения по многим иммиграционным категориям Ссылка на первоисточник: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...4371/hc-693.pdf</noindex> (93 страницы). Резюме – 11 страниц, на форум не влазит, поэтому резюме изменений на 11 страницах можно загрузить с нашего сайта: <noindex>http://www.legalcentre.org/files/HC693.docx</noindex> Изменения касаются почти всех категорий – отмена права апелляции, Tier 1, 2, 4, 5, «партнеры британцев» и т.п. - кроме граждан EU и членов их семей…. HC 693 · Administrative review · “Foreign criminals” · Changes relating to the validation of immigration applications · General Visitors · Private organ donors · Business Visitors · Private Medical Treatment Visitors · Marriage/Civil Partnership Visitors · Visitors in transit · Establish requirements to allow visa nationals to transit landside through the UK provided they · Commonwealth Games Family Members · Overseas Domestic Worker in a Private Household route · Family and private life · Minimum income threshold requirement under Appendix FM and Appendix FM-SE: · Partners and parents who need to meet an English language requirement for limited leave to enter or remain in the UK under Appendix FM, or partners needing to meet such a requirement in Part 8 or Appendix Armed Forces: · In respect of Appendix FM and the private life rules from 9 July 2012 · In respect of the Part 8: pre-9 July 2012 rules for partners and parents; and the current rules for some child applicants · Tier 1 of the Points-Based System · Tier 1 Exceptional Talent · Tier 1 (Investor) · Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) · Tier 1 (General) category (now closed) · Tier 2 · Tier 2 (Sportsperson) · Tier 4 (Academic Technology Approval Scheme) · Tier 5 Youth Mobility Scheme · Tier 5 Government Authorised Exchange category · Cross-cutting changes · “non-national travel document”. · Tier 2 (Sportsperson) and Tier 5 (Temporary Worker – Creative and Sporting) (Governing Bodies) · Secure English Language Test (SELT) providers · Financial Institutions · Appendix Armed Forces · Changes to Appendix Knowledge of Language and Life · Changes to Domestic Violence Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted October 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2014 Обновленный Long Residence Guidance: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/long-residence</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted October 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 Immigration Digest 10/14 •UK BA Modernized Guidance on Appeals from 20 October 2014: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/a...rnised-guidance</noindex> •UK BA Guidance on application from Overstayers: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...n-family-routes</noindex> •Tier 2 Priority service form to extend a visa as a dependant of someone who is switching into or extending into Tier 2, UK Visas and Immigration 23 October 2014 - <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste..._Form_09-14.pdf</noindex> •New UK BA visa and Nationality Fees: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste..._October_v1.pdf</noindex> •Section 65 of the Immigration Act 2014 – Children of British citizen fathers - <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...british-citizen</noindex> •The longest time the UK BA kept the detainee in detention was 1609 days •R (on the application of Hoomragh Chua) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2014] UKUT 00440(IAC) This was an article 8 case described by the judge as “completely hopeless”. The claimant had amassed 13 years of residence in the UK, the vast majority of which was as an overstayer. He had private life ties with siblings and nieces and nephews, but no family life in the UK. There was no evidence that the claimant did not have ties in his home country of Mauritius. Judicial review was refused. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Moderator fregat222 Posted November 3, 2014 Senior Moderator Report Share Posted November 3, 2014 Большинство британцев поддерживает выход из ЕС - опрос На возможном референдуме за выход из Евросоюза большинство британцев проголосовало бы за отделение. Таковы результаты опроса, проведенного исследовательским центром YouGov. Так, за отделение Великобритании от ЕС проголосовали бы 47% граждан и лишь 37% высказались бы против. Остальные не определились или не захотели раскрывать свою позицию. Больше всего евроскептиков живет в Уэльсе и в регионе Мидлендс в Англии: из них в ЕС хочет остаться треть, отделение поддерживает примерно половина населения. Вместе с тем, по данным опроса, большинство шотландцев хотели бы остаться в составе Евросоюза. За отделение Шотландии проголосовали бы 28%. Кроме того, опрос показал, что среди тех, кто определился со своей позицией, сейчас 52% шотландцев проголосовали бы за независимость от Великобритании и 48% выбрали бы остаться в составе Соединенного Королевства. По словам шотландского политика Николы Стерджен, при голосовании за отделение от ЕС Великобритания должна учитывать мнение каждой из частей Соединенного Королевства. Однако ранее британский премьер Дэвид Кэмерон отверг предложение Шотландской национальной партии (SNP), согласно которой Великобритания сможет выйти из состава ЕС, если каждая из четырех частей Соединенного Королевства на референдуме поддержит это решение. В то же время, как сообщают немецкие СМИ, канцлер ФРГ Ангела Меркель считает возможным выход Великобритании из Евросоюза. ]]>Источник]]> Quote Делай что должно и будь что будет Гарантированное получение статуса беженца, гражданство Украины/ПМЖ в Украине/еврейская и немецкая иммиграция и не только это информация о возможностей иммигрировать и эмигрировать Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted November 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 4, 2014 New application for UK visa as Tier 1 (Investor): form VAF9 appendix 2 <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...vaf9-appendix-2</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted November 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Обновился Guidance для 3-з категорий Tier 1 New Tier 1 Guidance: Tier 1 Entrepreneur: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...dance_06_11.pdf</noindex> Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...dance_06_11.pdf</noindex> Tier 1 (Investor): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...dance_06_11.pdf</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted November 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Visas and immigration operational guidance – Chapter 08: appendix FM family members (immigration directorate instructions) <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...rent_Routes.pdf</noindex> Creating a CoS: guide for business sponsors: SMS guide 8a <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...__CoS_11_14.pdf</noindex> Judgment of the Court of Justice in the European Union (CJEU) in Tumer C 311/13, Request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) 5 November 2014 The court holds that irregular migrants can invoke the protection of EU employment law. New Tier 1 Guidance: Tier 1 Entrepreneur: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ance_06_11.pdf</noindex> Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ance_06_11.pdf</noindex> Tier 1 (Investor): <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ance_06_11.pdf</noindex> New Tier 2 Guidance: Tier 2: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...__CoS_11_14.pdf</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted November 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Miah (interviewer’s comments: disclosure: fairness) [2014] UKUT 00515 (IAC) Conduct of pre-decision interviews (i) A decision that a marriage is a marriage of convenience for the purposes of regulation 2(1) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 is a matter of some moment. Fairness requires that the affected person must be alerted to the essential elements of the case against him. (ii) In addition, those involved must be alert to the question of whether, in an unusual or exceptional case, anything further is required in the interests of fairness. There may be difficult, borderline cases in which fairness will require identification of the third party. These do not admit of general guidance or resolution and will have to be addressed on a case by case basis, guided by the overarching requirement of fairness and balancing all interests in play. The making of the decision on the application (iii) The Secretary of State’s decision making process includes a process whereby comments, or opinions, of an interviewing officer are conveyed to the decision maker. In the generality of cases, this practice will not contaminate the fairness of the decision making process. The duty of the decision maker is to approach and consider all of the materials with an open mind and with circumspection. The due discharge of this duty, coupled with the statutory right of appeal, will provide the subject with adequate protection. Disclosure (iv) However, the document enshrining the interviewer’s comments – Form ICV.4605 – must be disclosed as a matter of course. An appellant’s right to a fair hearing dictates this course. If, exceptionally, some legitimate concern about disclosure, for example, the protection of a third party, should arise, this should be proactively brought to the attention of the Tribunal, for a ruling and directions. In this way the principle of independent judicial adjudication will provide adequate safeguards for the appellant. This will also enable mechanisms such as redaction, which in practice one would expect to arise with extreme rarity, to be considered. Bhimani (Student: Switching Institution: Requirements) [2014] UKUT 00516 (IAC) Where a student chooses to study at another institution holding a different sponsor licence number from that of the institution where he/she was granted leave to remain to study, he/she is required to make a fresh application for leave to remain. Tarakhel v Switzerland, (application no. 29217/12) European Court of Human Rights, 4 November 2014 The case is a Dublin return from Switzerland to Italy of a family with five children who had lived in dreadful conditions in Italy after being Eurodaced. The Court held 1. Declares, unanimously, the complaints of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible; 2. Holds, by fourteen votes to three, that there would be a violation of Article 3 of the Convention if the applicants were to be returned to Italy without the Swiss authorities having first obtained individual guarantees from the Italian authorities that the applicants would be taken charge of in a manner adapted to the age of the children and that the family would be kept together; 3. Holds, unanimously, that the Court’s finding at point 2 above constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants; 4. Holds, unanimously, (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the following amount, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement: EUR 7,000 (seven thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, in respect of costs and expenses; ( that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Immigration (European Economic Area) (Amendment) (No.3) Regulations 2006 (SI 2014/2671), laid before parliament 17 October 2014. Amend the Immigration Euroropean Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1003). The effect is that the “relevant period” during which a person is entitled to enjoy a right to reside in the United Kingdom as a jobseeker is 91 days. When combined with the initial three months of residence a jobseeker who entered the UK to seek employment will be able to enjoy a right to reside for six months. Thereafter compelling evidence must be provided that the person is continuing to seek employment and has a genuine chance of being engaged. In short, let us count the initial three months toward the six months as a jobseeker A person already resident can be a jobseeker for 91 days before being subject to the “compelling evidence” test. There are no changes to the six month period during which a person is entitled to retain worker status. There is transitional provision. Periods of time spent as a jobseeker after 31 December 2013, but prior to the coming into force of these regulations on 10 November 2014, are to be taken into account for the purposes of determining the relevant period. However, where such calculation of would result in a negative balance, it is to be taken to be zero. Such periods are also to be taken into consideration for the purposes of determining whether a person can enjoy a repeat period of residence as a jobseeker. Latest UK BA documents: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/latest?depart...and-immigration</noindex> UK Visas and Immigration web traffic: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/performance/site-activit...and-immigration</noindex> New Tribunal Procedure Rules for the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber): <noindex>http://www.ein.org.uk/news/new-tribunal-pr...amber-announced</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Moderator fregat222 Posted November 28, 2014 Senior Moderator Report Share Posted November 28, 2014 Кэмерон обнародовал план ограничения миграции в Британию Премьер-министр Великобритании Дэвид Кэмерон обнародовал планы правительства по сокращению соцпособий для мигрантов из стран ЕС. По словам премьера, Британия всегда приветствовала мигрантов из других стран, но эта система должна быть контролируемой, справедливой и основываться на интересах страны. Кэмерон заявил, в частности, что мигранты из ЕС должны прожить в стране не менее четырех лет, прежде чем они смогут получать льготы, будь то налоговые скидки или муниципальное жилье. Премьер подчеркнул, что если в мае он будет переизбран, эти реформы станут необходимым требованием на переговорах о членстве Великобритании в ЕС. Заявление Кэмерона прозвучало после сообщений о том, что число мигрантов в страну резко возросло в последние годы, несмотря на планы правительства уменьшить число проживающих в стране иностранцев. Британский премьер заявил, что если будет переизбран на новый срок, он предложит Брюсселю новые условия членства Великобритании в Европейском союзе. Кэмерон уверен в том, что ему удастся изменить основы европейской миграционной политики. Он считает, что Великобритания должна оставаться в ЕС. Референдум по этому вопросу планируется провести в 2017 году. Тем не менее, он предупредил, что если требования Великобритании не будут услышаны, он не исключает любой вариант развития событий. Это прозрачный намек на то, что Кэмерон может поддержать и выход страны из Европейского союза. Основные предложения Дэвида Кэмерона Лишить мигрантов из стран ЕС в течение первых четырех лет пребывания в Британии права на налоговые скидки и бесплатное муниципальное жилье. Лишить мигрантов права получать пособия на детей, живущих на пределами Соединенного Королевства. Выдворять мигрантов из Британии, если через полгода после въезда в страну они не найдут работу. Ограничить права мигрантов привозить в страну своих родственников. Ускорить депортацию осужденных преступников. Увеличить сроки запрета на повторный въезд в страну для попрошаек и мошенников, выдворенных из Великобритании. Запретить гражданам недавно вступивших в ЕС стран работать в Великобритании до тех пор, пока экономики этих стран не интегрируются в ЕС. Как заявил премьер-министр, эти правила останутся в силе, если консерваторы победят на всеобщих выборах в мае 2015 года. Кэмерон сказал, что озабоченность населения страны высоким уровнем миграции из стран ЕС в последние десять лет не является неоправданной или безосновательной. Изменения в системе социальных пособий для мигрантов, по его словам, сделают эту систему одной из самых жестких в Европе. "Мы заслуживаем того, чтобы быть услышанными, и нас должны услышать, - сказал Дэвид Кэмерон. – Этот вопрос важен для британцев и для нашего будущего в составе Евросоюза". По словам британского премьера, щедрая система социальных пособий, существующая в стране, привлекает мигрантов как магнит, но эту проблему необходимо решить. "Британцы не поймут, да и я не пойму, если не будет найден разумный выход, который позволит этой стране закрепиться в ЕС раз и навсегда", - подчеркнул британский премьер "В Европе сейчас идут споры о том, какие части европейского законодательства, какие части договора нужно изменить, но нет сомнений в том, что весь этот пакет предложений потребует изменений в основополагающем договоре, и я уверен, что нам удастся их добиться", - добавил Дэвид Кэмерон. Жесткая версия Политический обозреватель Би-би-си Ник Робинсон говорит, что предложения Дэвида Кэмерона являются более жесткими версиями планов, предложенных лейбористами и либерал-демократами, но четырехлетний запрет на получение пособий будет сложно согласовать с Брюсселем. Кэмерон отказался от лимита на количество мигрантов из ЕС, которые могут въезжать в страну ежегодно, поскольку, как считает Ник Робинсон, он осознал, что эта мера не получит поддержку лидеров других стран ЕС. Сейчас мигранты из стран ЕС могут свободно приезжать в Великобританию и устраиваться на работу без какого-либо иммиграционного контроля. Граждане стран, не входящих в ЕС, должны получать разрешение на работу, если они хотят трудоустроиться в Британии. Число рабочих виз ограничено. ]]>Источник]]> Quote Делай что должно и будь что будет Гарантированное получение статуса беженца, гражданство Украины/ПМЖ в Украине/еврейская и немецкая иммиграция и не только это информация о возможностей иммигрировать и эмигрировать Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m1a2x Posted December 5, 2014 Report Share Posted December 5, 2014 Решениями Верховного суда Соединенного Королевства (Supreme Court) от 18 июля 2012 г. по делам Munir и Alvi признаны незаконными те положения иммиграционных правил и относящихся к ним документов, которые не были утверждены Парламентом... Это означает, что если заявитель по какой-либо иммиграционной категории не соответствует требованиям, которые не прошли парламентские слушания и не были утверждены парламентом, то основания для отказа нет. Например, если заявитель успешно сдал тест по английскому языку, а этот тест не входит в список, утвержденный UKBA, то оснований для отказа нет, так как список тестов является самостоятельным документом, не входящим в иммиграционные правила, и он не был утвержден парламентом. То же самое относится к другим документам, ссылки на которые есть на сайте UKBA, например: • Codes of Practice; • список наиболее востребованных профессий (Shortage Occupation List); • перечень зарубежных банков, чьим документам доверяет либо не доверяет UKBA при рассмотрении визовых заявок, и т.п. Реакция правительства на судебные постановления была достаточно быстрой. Сразу же были опубликованы Statements of Changes (официальное заявление об изменениях), и с 20 июля 2012 года все перечисленные списки включены в иммиграционные правила. Теперь они не могут считаться незаконными. Все заявки, поданные 20 июля 2012 и позднее, будут рассматриваться с учетом этой поправки. Так как Statement of Changes не находился в Парламенте в течение определенного срока (не менее 21 дня), предусмотренного для того, чтобы документ получил законную силу, то изменения не могут считаться законными. В связи с этим в Statements of Changes был включен специальный пункт. Он обращает внимание парламентской комиссии (Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (formerly the Merits Committee) in the House of Lords) на тот факт, что данные изменения никак не повлияют на заявителей, спонсоров или визовых офицеров, рассматривающих заявки. Введенные поправки всего лишь включат существующие требования и списки, на которые ранее были только ссылки в иммиграционных правилах, непосредственно в правила, чтобы впредь избежать юридических проблем. Quote <noindex>Иностранцы</noindex> до добра не дооведут Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted December 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 Иммиграционный дайджест 12/14 Immigration Act implementation 20 October 2014 and Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules + Updated with Guidance: changes to transit visas, 28 November 2014 Updated with changes to marriage and civil preliminary notifications, Home Office, 25 November 2014 Updated 21 November 2014 with Statutory Instrument 2014 No. 3074 Financial Services and Markets Immigration. Updated 9 November with a link to the The Immigration Act 2014 (Transitional and Saving Provisions) Order 2014 (SI 2014/2928) into effect 10 November. 1/ The general order. <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/2874/contents/made</noindex> 2/ The English order (how tenancy agreements in England work with the scheme and modifications to the Act in light of comments at the panel). <noindex>http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/2873/contents/made</noindex> 3/ Main Code. <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ode-of-practice</noindex> 4/ Anti-disc Code. <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ode-of-practice</noindex> === Changes to marriage and civil preliminary notifications, Home Office, 24 November 2014 “The Government has announced changes to the process for giving notice of marriage or civil partnership to come into effect from Monday 2 March 2015. From this date, the notice period for all couples wishing to marry following civil preliminaries or form a civil partnership in England and Wales will be extended from 15 days to 28 days. The changes, which are part of the Immigration Act 2014, will ensure that the Home Office has more time to identify and investigate suspected sham marriages and civil partnerships. For couples involving a non-EEA (European Economic Area) national, where the Home Office suspects the couple are not genuine the notice period may be extended to 70 days to enable the Home Office to interview the couple and take further action as necessary. As well as the increase in the notice period registration officials have additional powers to share information to make sure appropriate action can be taken against couples suspected of being involved in a sham marriage. Couples seeking to get married in the Anglican Church where one or both is from outside the EEA will need to undertake civil preliminaries and give notice at a register office. Couples who give notice of a marriage or civil partnership before 2 March 2015 will not be affected by the changes. To find out further information about the changes please visit the following address: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/marriages-civil-partners...register-office</noindex> === Changes to marriage and civil preliminary notifications, Home Office, 24 November 2014 <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...il-partnerships</noindex> === Employer checking service form: check employee's right to work, UK Visas and Immigration, 24 November 2014 <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...s-right-to-work</noindex> === Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill 2014 - 15, 26 November 2014 New Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures; new provisions on temporary exclusion from the United Kingdom, designed for those with a right of abode in the UK (a category which of course includes all British citizens); new authority to carry schemes. === The targets of many of these measures are British citizens, but using the methods of immigration control. <noindex>http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-1...ndsecurity.html</noindex> === Immigration Directorate Instruction Family Migration: Chapter 8 Transitional Provisions, Family Members under Part 8 and Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules, Home Office, 26 November 2014 <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...vember_2014.pdf</noindex> === Systemic Obstacles to Children's Registration as British Citizens, Legal Research Report, Ealing Law Centre, 30 November 2014 <noindex>http://ealinglawcentre.org.uk.gridhosted.c...on-30-11-14.pdf</noindex> === Application for an Initial Grant of Leave (Switching) or an Extension of Leave and Biometric Residence Permit under Tier 1 (Investor) Main Applicant, UK Visas and Immigration, 1 December 2014 <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste..._Form_12-14.pdf</noindex> === Guidance: Chapter 1a: applications for fee waiver and refunds, UK Visas and Immigration, 3 December 2014 The policy withdrawn on 28th November has been published again as part of the interim arrangements, to which a separate link is provided. These were put in place following the judgment R (Carter) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 2603 (Admin). <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ver-and-refunds</noindex> Interim Guidance: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...-for-applicants</noindex> === Policy paper: Immigration Rules archive: 6 November to 30 November 2014, UK Visas and Immigration, 3 December 2014 file:///C:/Users/Anton/Downloads/14.12.03-Policy-paper-Immigration-Rules-archive-6-November-to-30-November-2014.pdf === Sultana and Others (rules: waiver/further enquiry; discretion) [2014] UKUT 00540 (IAC) (1) Paragraph [D] of Appendix FM-SE is an example, within the context of the requirement to supply specified evidence, of the increasing influence ofdiscretionary powers of waiver and further enquiry in the Immigration Rules. (2) Where applicants wish to invoke any discretion of this kind, they should do so when making the relevant application, highlighting the specific provision of the Rules invoked and the grounds upon which the exercise of discretion is requested. (3) Where any request of this kind is made and refused, a brief explanation should be provided by the decision maker. (4) A refusal to exercise a discretionary power as described in (1) above may render an immigration decision not in accordance with the law, under section 84(1)(e) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. (5) Powers of waiver are dispensing provisions, designed to ensure that applications suffering from certain minor defects or omissions can be readily remedied. (6) The hierarchical distinction between the Immigration Rules and Immigration Directorate Instructions (“IDIs”) must be observed at all times. (7) A failure to recognise, or give effect to, an IDI may render an immigration decision not in accordance with the law. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted December 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 Bhimani (Student: Switching Institution: Requirements) [2014] UKUT 00516 (IAC) Where a student chooses to study at another institution holding a different sponsor licence number from that of the institution where he/she was granted leave to remain to study, he/she is required to make a fresh application for leave to remain. Miah (interviewer’s comments: disclosure: fairness) [2014] UKUT 00515 (IAC) Conduct of pre-decision interviews (i) A decision that a marriage is a marriage of convenience for the purposes of regulation 2(1) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 is a matter of some moment. Fairness requires that the affected person must be alerted to the essential elements of the case against him. (ii) In addition, those involved must be alert to the question of whether, in an unusual or exceptional case, anything further is required in the interests of fairness. There may be difficult, borderline cases in which fairness will require identification of the third party. These do not admit of general guidance or resolution and will have to be addressed on a case by case basis, guided by the overarching requirement of fairness and balancing all interests in play. The making of the decision on the application (iii) The Secretary of State’s decision making process includes a process whereby comments, or opinions, of an interviewing officer are conveyed to the decision maker. In the generality of cases, this practice will not contaminate the fairness of the decision making process. The duty of the decision maker is to approach and consider all of the materials with an open mind and with circumspection. The due discharge of this duty, coupled with the statutory right of appeal, will provide the subject with adequate protection. Disclosure (iv) However, the document enshrining the interviewer’s comments – Form ICV.4605 – must be disclosed as a matter of course. An appellant’s right to a fair hearing dictates this course. If, exceptionally, some legitimate concern about disclosure, for example, the protection of a third party, should arise, this should be proactively brought to the attention of the Tribunal, for a ruling and directions. In this way the principle of independent judicial adjudication will provide adequate safeguards for the appellant. This will also enable mechanisms such as redaction, which in practice one would expect to arise with extreme rarity, to be considered. JO and Others (section 55 duty) Nigeria [Decision remade/ Appeal allowed / SSHD to re-make decision in line with judgement] (1) The duty imposed by section 55 of the Borders Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 requires the decision-maker to be properly informed of the position of a child affected by the discharge of an immigration etc function. Thus equipped, the decision maker must conduct a careful examination of all relevant information and factors. (2) Being adequately informed and conducting a scrupulous analysis are elementary prerequisites to the inter-related tasks of identifying the child's best interests and then balancing them with other material considerations. (3) The question whether the duties imposed by section 55 have been duly performed in any given case will invariably be an intensely fact sensitive and contextual one. In the real world of litigation, the tools available to the court or tribunal considering this question will frequently be confined to the application or submission made to Secretary of State and the ultimate letter of decision. Sultana and Others (rules: waiver/further enquiry; discretion) [2014] UKUT 00540 (IAC) (1) Paragraph [D] of Appendix FM-SE is an example, within the context of the requirement to supply specified evidence, of the increasing influence of discretionary powers of waiver and further enquiry in the Immigration Rules. (2) Where applicants wish to invoke any discretion of this kind, they should do so when making the relevant application, highlighting the specific provision of the Rules invoked and the grounds upon which the exercise of discretion is requested. (3) Where any request of this kind is made and refused, a brief explanation should be provided by the decision maker. (4) A refusal to exercise a discretionary power as described in (1) above may render an immigration decision not in accordance with the law, under section 84(1)(e) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. (5) Powers of waiver are dispensing provisions, designed to ensure that applications suffering from certain minor defects or omissions can be readily remedied. (6) The hierarchical distinction between the Immigration Rules and Immigration Directorate Instructions (“IDIs”) must be observed at all times. (7) A failure to recognise, or give effect to, an IDI may render an immigration decision not in accordance with the law. R (on the application of Mohammed Alam Mamour) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2014] UKUT 00512(IAC) This case was a judicial review of the Secretary of State’s refusal to treat the Claimant’s representations as a fresh claim. The Claimant had been age disputed but had been found to be a minor by the Immigration Tribunal, who refused him asylum. The Secretary of State failed to apply her policy to grant discretionary leave to remain (DLR) to minors. The Applicant was ultimately removed to Afghanistan as a young adult and pursued his claim from there – he unsuccessfully sought an Order for his return. The Court held that the refusal to grant DLR was within the range of reasonable responses open to the Secretary of State and was thus not irrational. However when considering Article 8, the Secretary of State had acted unlawfully by failing to take due account of the fact that the failure to grant the Applicant DLR is a disadvantage of itself requiring consideration in the proportionality balancing exercise. The Secretary of State had also erred by making a misstatement of fact regarding the age dispute which allowed the Tribunal and High Court to proceed on a mistaken factual basis in permitting the applicant’s removal from the UK. Two years later, this did not require to be corrected by an Order for his return because it was not a foregone conclusion that he would succeed in establishing his fresh claim – the Secretary of State’s decision was quashed and must be remade. R (on the application of Khadija BA Fakih) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2014] UKUT 00513(IAC) The applicant challenged the imposition of a “no recourse to public funds” condition on her leave on grounds that it was was made pursuant to a ‘rule’ that was unlawful by reason of not having been laid before Parliament and breached public sector equality duties. The Secretary of State’s decision to impose the condition was quashed on the basis that it was pursuant to an unlawful policy. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted December 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 R (on the application of Jowanski Muwonge) v Secretary of State for the Home Department(consent orders: costs: guidance)IJR [2014] UKUT 00514(IAC) (i) There appears to be a practice, relatively entrenched, whereby an AOS which contains a concession, with or without an accompanying draft consent order, incorporates a claim for costs, liquidated or otherwise. In most cases, the claim for costs has no justification. (ii) There may be cases, likely to be small in number, where an AOS which embodies a concession on behalf of the Secretary of State, with or without an accompanying draft consent order, justifiably and reasonably incorporates a claim for costs. In such cases, good practice dictates that the AOS should state, briefly, the justification for such claim. (iii) Where a draft consent order is tabled, both parties should proactively take all necessary and appropriate steps designed to achieve consensual resolution within a period of (at most) three weeks. (iv) Where consensual resolution is not achieved within the timescale recommended above, this should operate as a bilateral incentive to redouble efforts to do so. (v) In every case possessing the factor of an unexecuted draft consent order, it is essential to provide the Upper Tribunal with each party’s explanation, brief and focussed, for non-execution. This explanation should be provided by both parties, in writing: (a) Within four weeks of the date of the AOS or, if different, the date of receipt of the draft consent order. ( Where a case is listed, not later than five clear working days in advance of the listing date. © In cases where there is any material alteration or evolution in the terms of the explanation, not later than two clear days in advance of the listing date. (vi) It is recognised that, exceptionally, there may be cases in which for good and sustainable reasons a consent order cannot be reasonably executed until a very late stage indeed, postdating the periods and landmarks noted above. However, the experience of the Upper Tribunal to date is that consent orders are very frequently not executed and presented to the Tribunal for approval until the last moment, frequently late on the day before the scheduled hearing and that no good reason is proffered for the parties’ failure to do so at an earlier stage. This practice is unacceptable. (vii) The practice whereby executed consent orders materialise during the period of 48 hours prior to the listing date is unsatisfactory and unacceptable in the great majority of cases. The Upper Tribunal recognises that there may be a small number of cases where, exceptionally, this is unavoidable. (viii) In matters of this kind, parties and their representatives are strongly encouraged to communicate electronically with the Tribunal and, further, to seek confirmation that important communications and/or attachments have been received. (ix) In determining issues of costs, Upper Tribunal Judges will take into account the extent to which the recommendations and exhortations tabulated above have been observed and will scrutinise closely every explanation and justification proffered for non-compliance. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted January 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2015 Recent GOV.UK updates: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/latest?depart...-immigration%20</noindex> ‘Visa bans’: Powers to refuse or revoke immigration permission for reasons of character, conduct or associations - Commons Library Standard Note: <noindex>http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/S...or-associations</noindex> Immigration Statistics, July to September 2014: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...-september-2014</noindex> New SET(LR) form: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...n-uk-form-setlr</noindex> & Guidance: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...notes_08-14.pdf</noindex> Tier 2 Modernized Guidance: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...r_2_v18_Ext.pdf</noindex> An Inspection of Nationality Casework April - May 2014, Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration and response from Home Office, 11 December 2014: <noindex>http://icinspector.independent.gov.uk/wp-c...-Report-web.pdf</noindex> Application for certificate showing right of abode: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...-right-of-abode</noindex> R (on the application of Luma Sh Khairdin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (NIA 2002: Part 5A) IJR [2014] UKUT 00566 (IAC) (1) Section 117A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 requires the Upper Tribunal, in a judicial review involving Article 8(2) ECHR, to have regard to the considerations mentioned in section 117B and, where relevant, section 117C, when considering the question whether an interference with a person's right to respect for private and family life is justified. The nature of the proceedings is such as to require the Tribunal to determine the questions set out in section 117(1)(a) and (. (2) Where the Upper Tribunal is considering, pursuant to section 11 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, whether there is an error of law in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involving Article 8 proportionality, the task of the Upper Tribunal is confined (at that point) to deciding if the First-tier Tribunal's assessment of where to strike the balance was unlawful, according to the error of law principles set out in R (Iran) [2005] EWCA Civ 982. An Article 8(2) decision of the Secretary of State which is susceptible only to judicial review has, by definition, not received such judicial scrutiny; and it is the task of the reviewing court or tribunal to provide it, albeit via a process that remains different from that of an appeal. R (on the application of Isaac Kimondo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (relevant rules; AoS requirements) IJR [2014] UKUT 00565 (IAC) (1) In judicial review applications transferred by the Administrative Court to the Upper Tribunal, the applicable procedural regime is that contained in the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008. The Civil Procedure Rules have no effect thereafter; although the procedural history may be significant, particularly as regards time limits. (2) The prohibition in rule 29(3) on a party who has not filed an acknowledgement of service from taking part in the application permission (without the Upper Tribunal’s permission) applies also to a party who has failed to provide a copy of the AoS to the applicant, as required by rule 29(2A). Employer's guidance right to work checks, 23 December 2014: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ber_2014_v4.pdf</noindex> The Home Office is weeding the nationality instructions and has removed some from Volume 2 Part 1 (Procedural section) Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted January 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2015 ПОЗИТИВ: Surinder Singh, теперь Kamila Santos Campelo Secretary of State for the Home Department v Kamila Santos Campelo Cain Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/40868/2013 (17 October 2014) The appellant was a Brazilian national who wished to join her British partner in the UK. Her partner had been exercising EU free movement rights prior to his returning to the UK. The appellant argued that the principles laid down in Surinder Singh [1992] EUECJ C-370/90 should be applied to her case. The Tribunal agreed. It held that the EEA Regulations discriminated against British versus EEA nationals – had the appellant’s partner been an EEA national she would have been able to enter under the Regulations. The Regulations were thus out of step with the underlying principle of free movement in EU Community law. The appellant’s partner was a British national exercising Treaty Rights and fell to be treated as an EEA national as a result. The appeal was allowed, but not outright – the Tribunal noting that the Secretary of State retains a discretion as to whether or not to grant the appellant her residence card. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted January 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2015 Obligatory referral to the UK BA in certain cases: Giving notice of marriage or civil partnership from the 2nd March 2015: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...age_notice.pdf</noindex> “If you and/or your partner are a non-EEA national with limited or no immigration status in the UK, or if you or your partner do not provide specified evidence of your immigration status, your proposed marriage or civil partnership will be referred to the Home Office and your notice period may be extended to 70 days. In giving notice you should therefore allow sufficient time before the date of your planned marriage or civil partnership recognising that 70 days notice may be required.” R (on the application of Jennifer Kerr) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2014] UKUT 00493(IAC) The applicant was a Jamaican woman who had lived in Jamaica until age 37, then came to the UK on a 6-month visit visa and overstayed. She married a British national and a year later, having had 11 years unlawful residence in the UK, applied for leave to remain on Article 8 grounds outside the rules. The Secretary of State refused on the basis that she did not meet the Rules. The Court held that the decision was unlawful, because it had failed to give any consideration to the possibility of an exceptional grant outside the rules – even the barest of reference would have sufficed, but there was none. After the judicial review was lodged the Secretary of State issued a new decision, considering all of the facts that were relevant to a possible grant outside the Rules, and again refused on the basis it was not disproportionate to require the appellant to make an entry clearance application from Jamaica. The Court rejected an argument that the second decision letter should be ignored – it is relevant to the remedy the Court should grant. If the second decision is a lawful one it does not remedy the defect in the original decision under challenge, which remains unlawful. However the Court will do no more than quash it and will not order the decision to be remade if it has already been made. R (on the application of Eruteji Ibipeju Bosomo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2014] UKUT 00492(IAC) This was an Article 8 case where the application for leave was subjected to a “tick box” exercise under the Immigration Rules without any consideration given to the detailed information provided by the appellant that was relevant to a possible grant of leave outside the Rules; this was unlawful. In response to the judicial review the Secretary of State issued a new decision, however this was a mere repetition of the earlier unlawful decision and similarly failed to consider the voluminous material submitted by the appellant. Judicial review was granted and the Secretary of State’s remaking of the decision had no effect on the question of relief, as the second decision was again unlawful. R (on the application of Michael Mosinimu Mark Akande) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKUT 00468 (IAC) Facts: The appellant made an online application for extension of his leave as a student on the day it expired. He paid the fee on that day and lodged the application online, choosing the “premium service”. The Secretary of State argued that his actual date of application was the date of his appointment at UKBA (as it then was) offices in Sheffield, which was three days later, making his application out of time. The Secretary of State also argued that the appellant did not have enough funds to satisfy the Rules, as it was not accepted that his uncle was his legal guardian and thus his uncle’s funds could not be taken into account. The appellant argued that (i) the date of his online application was the relevant date, (ii) the Secretary of State was wrong to disregard the financial sponsorship of his uncle, who is in fact his legal guardian, and (iii) the Secretary of State failed to consider his claim under Art 8 of the ECHR. Decision: As to the question of the date of application, the Tribunal preferred the evidence of the Secretary of State on the matter and held that the application was not submitted until the date of the in-person appointment, three days after leave had expired. On the second issue, the appellant had not provided the requisite documentation to the Secretary of State to establish his uncle’s guardianship, so this ground of challenge was not made out. Finally, the Tribunal held that the appellant’s Article 8 claim was weak and the Secretary of State could not be faulted for refusing it. The appeal was dismissed. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted January 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Обновился т.н. Booklet AN, включая "The Good Character Requirement" То, о чем я писал в конце 2014 года - ужек происходит. Для тех, кто не не имеет возможности месяцами изучать 52 главы Naturalization Instructions :-) Собственно говоря: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...t_dec_2014.pdf</noindex> Всего 22 страницы :-) Более-менее понятно, в течение какого периода нельзя подавать за то или иное нарушение. Так же указывается то, что за прошлый обман и другие плохие посупки в прошлом так же будут влиять на возможность получить гражданство. Для тех, кто имел в прошлом проблемы с законом или нарушения, которые могут ТЕПЕРЬ привести к отказу в заявлении на гражданство, могут ознакомиться с детальным документом (уже 31 страница) под названием The Good Character Requirement: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...eb_version.pdf</noindex> Получить гражданство Великобритании сейчас становится сложнее... Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted January 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 Легализация родителей-нелегалов через детей, проживших в UK 7 лет. В 2012 года обратилась семейная пара, живущая в UK нелегально. У них в UK родились дети. В 2012 году старшему было 7 лет, младшему – 3 года. Подали заявление по категории, которую на простом языке можно описать как «легализация через ребенка, прожившего в UK 7 лет» до изменения Правил в 2013 году. В 2013 (после изменения Правил) пришел отказ без права апелляции. Подали на пересмотр. Пересмотр занял 1 с лишним года. Вместо решения UK BA прислали дополнительную анкету с вопросами – было похоже, что UK BA потеряли ранее поданные и не знали, на основании чего клиенты просили статус. Отослали дополнительную анкету. К этому времени на Украине началась АТО. Клиенты были из зоны АТО. Дослали в UK BA “напоминание" о том, что сейчас происходит на Украине, приложили информацию из авторитетных источников. Подходил к концу 2014 год. В декабре 2014 года UK BA прислали еще одну анкету, которая по своему содержанию походила на анкету для просящих убежище. Анкету заполнили, но я указал на то, что клиенты не просят убежище, а подавали на получение статуса на основании того, что их старший ребенок прожил в стране уже не только 7 лет, а на тот момент уже почти 10 лет и, соответственно, их ребенок мог бы быть зарегистрирован как британский малолетний гражданин. В начале января 2015 года всей семье пришло приглашение на сдачу биометрики. В середине января 2015 года я подал заявление на регистрацию старшего ребенка как британского малолетнего гражданина, т.к. к тому времени ребенок прожил без выезда из UK 10 лет. Одновременно дослал в отдел UK BA, занимающимся рассмотрением первоначального дела о легализации всей семьи подтверждение о том, что уже было подано на регистрацию старшего ребенка как британского малолетнего гражданина. Сегодня (через 2 недели) курьер DX принес невзрачный конверт, с BRP на 2.5 года. То есть, как пример, родитель получил статус по категории «10 Year Route”. Такую визу нужно будет продлять еще 4 раза, чтобы такой родитель после 10 лет мог подать на ILR. Весь процесс занял 2.5 года. Собственно, все. Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Вместо EEA3 и EEA4 теперь 1 форма - EEA(PR) на 121 страницу ! <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...A_PR__01-15.pdf</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 А вместо EEA1 и EEA2 теперь есть форма EEA(FM) ...на 129 страницах : <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...A_FM__01-15.pdf</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted February 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Расценки на стоимость "виз" UK BA в 2015/2016 гг Собственно говоря: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...015-to-2016.pdf</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
British Lawyer Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 •Request for a change of conditions of leave granted on the basis of family or private life <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...e-condition.pdf</noindex> •The total number of rejections made on Long Residence category in 2014: 845 cases rejected : <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...-september-2014</noindex> •Applications for naturalisation received from 1 May 2014 to 30 June 2014: <noindex>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...97098/33753.pdf</noindex> Quote Помощь русскоговорящего адвоката высшей категории: консультации, проверка заявлений, ведение дел: www.legalcentre.org Mob/Viber/WhatsApp:+44(0)77 911 45 923, Skype: immigration_lawyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...