UK & EEA Immigration Lawyer & Advocate

Страница 33 из 39 ПерваяПервая ... 233132333435 ... ПоследняяПоследняя
Показано с 321 по 330 из 383

Тема: Новости UK & EEA Immigration Law от Legal Centre, 07791145923

  1. #321
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    Part 2 on the new - EUSS:

    The accompanying ministerial statement says:

    “We expect the vast majority of EUSS applicants to be genuine, and for there to be little need for status granted under the EUSS to be cancelled at the border or curtailed in-country.

    However, it is appropriate that, to safeguard the integrity of the EUSS, its status should be covered by some of the same powers as other forms of immigration leave, so that appropriate action can be taken where necessary.”

    There has always been a worry that pre-settled or settled status could be cancelled or curtailed. These changes bring life to those concerns.

    An application for pre-settled status or settled status may (discretionary) now be refused if the applicant has previously been refused entry to the UK under the EEA Regulations. There are instances where EEA citizens or their family members have been incorrectly refused entry to the UK and it requires them to challenge that refusal from outside. It is a long drawn out process that often requires the assistance of a lawyer like the ones from the Legal Centre (www.legalcentre.org ). In many instances these border decisions go unchallenged. Now those historic decisions may be used as a ground to refuse an EUSS application.

    An application for pre-settled or settled status may also be refused if it relates to someone who previously had such leave, but that leave was cancelled sometime in the past. This includes, not just leave granted under the EU Settlement Scheme from within the UK, but also leave granted in the course of an application to join an EEA national in the UK for the first time under Appendix EU (Family Permit).

    This means that a person’s pre-settled and, crucially, settled status is by no means a guaranteed status. The refusal of the application must be justified on public policy, public security or public health grounds under the EEA Regulations or, if it occurs after a no-deal Brexit, on the grounds that the decision is conductive to the public good.

    It essentially it requires a serious criminal offence and, amongst other requirements, the individual has to represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society, with higher thresholds to overcome the longer someone has resided in the UK. Public good grounds have a much lower thresholds and is not just about offences but about the adverse conduct of an individual.
    A person could now be living outside the UK with pre-settled status or settled status, and they could face the cancellation of their leave by the Home Office for this reason. This cancellation can occur on their arrival in the UK or while they are living outside the UK.

    We, the lawyers at the Legal Centre, know too well that the Home Office decisions are sometimes of very poor quality. They often do not apply the public policy, public security, public health grounds or public good grounds properly, lawfully and correctly. An EEA citizen or their family members must have done something wrong to warrant Home Office attention in this way, but we often see the Home Office trying to cancel leave because of very minor offences or actions. This does leave individuals rather vulnerable to poor decision making.

    Either statuses could also be cancelled on the basis that false or misleading information, representations or documents were submitted (including false or misleading information) and that material was used to obtain such status. It does not matter if the applicant did or did not know such material was false or misleading. This is major worry because the automatic nature of the EU Settlement Scheme application and the restrictiveness of its declarations has, in some instances, granted status based on incorrect information.

    For example, an EEA citizen might now be living outside the UK but continuing to work for a UK based company and taxed accordingly. The EEA citizen intends to rely on a five-year continuous residence that occurred before they left the UK. But the nature of the automated residence checks mean that the application inadvertently grants settled status based on the tax information for the period they are outside the UK. The EEA citizen than accepts the application form declarations on the basis that the information is correct.

    If the EEA citizen is aware of how the system works, they could, in theory, contact the Settlement Resolution Centre to try to remedy this. But if they do not know how the system works, there is no obvious way that they would be aware they are unknowingly accepting settled status based on misleading information.

    In this scenario, the EEA citizen is obviously eligible for settled status, but they were granted it based on false information and not based on the correct period of residence. The manner in which the Statement of Changes is drafted does not make it clear that, in this scenario, the EEA citizen might not be vulnerable to their leave being cancelled for such a reason. There are many other instances of leave being granted based on incorrect information, though the grant is correct had the right information been requested or obtained. I worry that there may be instances of wrong or unduly harsh cancellations without due regard to the facts and backgrounds of the individual’s circumstances.

    The rules also provide for the cancellation of leave where the applicant no longer meets the requirements of Appendix EU. Pre-settled status granted under these Rules is in no means a guaranteed route to settlement, it is now not guaranteed a person can retain pre-settled status to acquire the opportunity to apply for settled status. For example, a family member may cease to be a family member during the pre-settled status grant but cannot in any other way retain their status, they would find their leave cancelled and will need to investigate other routes to acquiring leave under the Rules or apply on human rights grounds to remain in the UK.

    Additionally, a person could acquire an Appendix EU Family Permit to join an EEA citizen in the UK but could find that permit cancelled at the border based on adverse conduct after Brexit occurs but before they travel. There are particular concerns of poor decision making at the border. The time pressures of border control do not provide the optimum conditions for reasoned, thoughtful decision making. Entering the UK with a past adverse record of conduct, however minor, is not guaranteed.

    We, the Legal Centre, have always been stressing that the British citizenship would have been a much better option, and therefore we can help you at any time now. All you need to to is to book your initial consultation with us via https://www.legalcentre.org/Initial-Consultation.html

  2. #322
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    12 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >>> The 2 Years Post Study Work Visa will be available again, apparently : https://www.gov.uk/government/news/w...ional-students

    The news in 1 sentence:

    “The Post Study Work Scheme will allow students to work in the UK for the employ-er of their choice for up to 2 years”.

    The two-year Post Study Work Visa will be re-introduced, apparently. Multiple statements, from the Prime Minister, the Business Secretary, the Department for Education and, last and least, the Home Office have been released announcing the resurrection of a visa originally introduced in 2004 and killed off by Theresa May in 2012.

    As background, the earliest incarnation of the post study work visa was the Science and Engineering Graduates Scheme in 2004, when the visa was limited to graduates in certain subjects and a 12-month post-graduation period of work was permitted. A similar scheme was trialed across all subject areas in Scotland from 2005 as the Fresh Talent: Working in Scot-land Scheme, back in the days when regional immigration policy was permitted. The period of work permitted was extended to two years. The scheme was judged a success and rolled out across the UK in 2007 as the International Graduates Scheme, but offering only a 12 month post-graduation period in which work was permitted. It was then absorbed into the Points Based System from 2008 as the Tier 1 (Post Study Work) visa. A more limited six-month form of the post-study work visa was reintroduced recently.

    The date of implementation is not entirely clear yet, but the announcement suggests it will be available to students starting in the next academic year, September 2020. It is unknown whether current students already on courses in the UK will also benefit from the rule change. It is a shame that space could not be found for the measure in the formal Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules was dropped just two days ago, which would have provided clarity and certainty to all concerned.

    The return of the Blair-era drive to recruit foreign students and acknowledgment that there is stiff international competition to attract them has, unsurprisingly, been welcomed by universities themselves. Alistair Jarvis, Chief Executive of Universities UK, is quoted in the press release as saying:
    “This is very positive news. Evidence shows that international students bring significant positive
    social outcomes to the UK as well as £26 billion in economic contributions, but for too long the lack of post-study work opportunities in the UK has put us at a competitive disadvantage in attracting those students.”

    The introduction of a two-year post-study work visa is something Universities UK has long campaigned for, and we strongly welcome this policy change, which will put us back where we belong as a first choice study destination. Not only will a wide range of employers now have access to talented graduates from around the world, these students hold lifelong links in the UK.

    An estimated 14% of all university income is from the substantial fees paid by foreign students. Not only that but foreign students contribute considerably to the wider economy when they live in the UK, provide a potential talent pool from which employers can recruit and offer potentially huge ‘soft power’ influence to the United Kingdom in the future.

    Foreign students fell out of favor under Theresa May for two reasons. Firstly, the insane net migration target meant that any migrant, even an otherwise highly desirably one, became undesirable. May herself said in 2011 when announcing the scrapping of post study work visas:

    “The package of measures that I have outlined today is expected to reduce the number of student visas by between 70,000 and 80,000—a reduction of more than 25%—and it will increase the outflow of foreign students after they have concluded their studies.”

    The scrapping of this visa was closely associated with May herself and Ministers have been scrambling to dissociated themselves from it. The previous Home Secretary himself, Sajid Javid, who was until recently nominally in charge of immigration policy, has tweeted that it is ‘About time. Should have reversed this silly policy years ago.’ Jo Johnson was known to have championed re-introduction of the visa before he quit his brother’s government last week:

    “About time. Should have reversed this silly policy years ago. Britain should always be open to the best talent from across the world. https://t.co/sAx1BIFSIR
    — Sajid Javid (@sajidjavid) September 10, 2019”

    The second reason for the fall from grace of this group was that the Home Office wrongly thought that loads of foreign students were overstaying their visas. In fact, the latest evidence is that a tiny percentage do so. With the adjusted data, there was really no rationale for driving numbers down.

    Finally, it seems noteworthy that a range of government departments are being associated with the announcement. Even the Department for Education is in on the act. Is this a sign that immigration policy is no longer driven entirely by the Home Office? Let us hope so. Those hoping for a relaxation of the incredibly harsh family immigration rules may be dis-appointed, though. Foreign students are relatively popular in opinion polling. Migrant family members are not. The timing of this announcement, just after a Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules which could have implemented the policy and at a time when Conservative electoral strategists must be searching around for a way to make the government seem more liberal, certainly points to this being about positive polling rather than good governance.

    >>> UKVI update: Family members of points-based system migrants: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...-jTpgSKkTiw2ch

    This version replaces the ‘Dependant family members of points-based system migrants and Appendix W Workers version 16.0’ which has been withdrawn and archived. It covers minor technical changes.

    >>> UKVI update: Family life (as a partner or parent), private life and exceptional circumstances: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...7fBxnC5C2gHu6E

    Minor update to amend LTR requirements to mirror rules.

    >>> UKVI update: First-tier Tribunal bail: completing the bail summary: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...SoTYX3ahY81Y5I

    Amendments have been made to some of the wording in the Standard paragraphs when op-posing bail section.

  3. #323
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    13 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >>> All UK BA news, in one place: https://www.gov.uk/government/latest...nd-immigration

    >>> Lack of accommodation does not prevent claim for unlawful detention: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC...2019/2351.html

    In DM (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 2351 (Admin), the High Court ruled that the lack of accommodation for foreign national offenders cannot be a defence in a claim for unlawful detention.

  4. #324
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    16 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >>> Will the UK BA accept all English language tests from an approved provider?

    From the UK BA: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...language-tests

    “No. Any tests taken from 6 April 2015 must be on the approved SELT list. You can take IELTS or Trinity tests for many reasons at different centres but only those IELTS and Trinity tests specified for immigration use and taken at an approved centre can be used as part of an application for immigration purposes.

    You should take care when booking your test to ensure that the test that you book is the one approved for SELT:

    • for IELTS, ensure that you choose ‘IELTS
    for UKVI’ rather than ‘IELTS’;

    • for Trinity, ensure that you choose ‘Secure
    English Language Tests for UKVI’.”

  5. #325
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    19 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >>> Document reduction pilot

    Beginning the 16 September 2019 the UKVI has launched a document reduction pilot for Settlement Appendix FM Spouse and Partner applications submitted at 6 VACs in India (New Delhi, North Mumbai, South Mumbai, Jalandhar, Chandigarh and Ahmedabad).

    UKVI has confirmed as follows:

    1. That they want to ensure this pilot runs as smoothly as possible and involves all parties so they are proposing that it is run in 2 phases starting from 16 September. Phase 1 will trial the pilot in the 6 Indian VACs mentioned above before they extend it out to other locations.
    2. That the pilot won’t stop customers submitting additional evidence if they want it to be considered. UKVI will be asking their Commercial Partners to relay to customers that the quantity of relationship documentation isn’t required by UKVI and giving them guidance on what they may like to submit to satisfy what UKVI want to see, remembering that there is no specified evidence requirements when submitting relationship evidence. But if a customer insists on submitting thousands of photos and conversations, then they won’t stop them from doing so.
    3. Phase 1 of the pilot is expected to run for around 8 weeks before being evaluated, at which point consideration will be given to extending the pilot before any recommendations are made to make it permanent.
    4. With regards to evaluating the pilot UKVI intend to capture data in regards to the conversations that have taken place with customers and what documentation is then submitted, evalu-ate that and evaluate both the customer experience from feedback requests as well as the operational decision making impact.
    5. With regards to anticipated next steps the trial will be phased with incremental increases before proposals to make this permanent are considered in 2020.

    The text of the notice produced by UKVI for use by the VACs is as follows:

    “Scanning documents provided to support Appendix FM Spouse/Partner visa applications

    Customers often tell us that it is difficult to be sure which documents to provide in support of a settlement visa application. This can often lead to far too many documents being brought to the visa application centre to be scanned.

    With immediate effect, we have instructed our commercial partner, VFS not to scan all documents provided in support of:

    - Appendix FM spouse (where the sponsor is in salaried employment and non-salaried employment in the UK) and;
    - Appendix FM partner (where the sponsor is in salaried employment and non-salaried employment in the UK) visa applications and;
    - Children under the age of 18 years who are applying at the same time as the main applicants as described above.

    The documents we will NOT accept are:

    • Money Transfers
    • Greeting Cards
    • Phone Cards
    • Letters from friends
    • Call Logs
    • Wedding Receipts/Invitations
    • USB/DVD’s
    • Newspaper Clippings

    We will only accept a limited number of pages of the following documents:

    • Chat history (WhatsApp and social media) - If you wish to submit copies of chat history, you are strongly advised to submit no more than 10 A4 pages of chat. The chat history should demonstrate your relationship over a period of time.
    • Photographs - You are strongly advised to submit no more than a total of 10 photographs. You can include photographs from your wedding and/or a range of other photographs sup-porting your relationship over a period of time.

    These are the documents that customers most commonly send us. It is not compulsory for you to provide any of these documents. If we need any further information to decide your visa application, we will contact you direct by phone or email.”

    >>> CJEU: expulsion of family members who lose right of residence must still comply with EU law: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/documen...1&cid=14628768

    The Court of Justice held that a person who had previously been a qualifying family member under Directive 2004/38 but had later lost that status could only be expelled in compliance with Articles 27 and 28. Further, the automatic ban on re-entry was not permitted:

    “the expulsion decision that may be made in the case in the main proceedings cannot, under any circumstances, impose a ban on entry into the territory.”

    The judgment in Chenchooliah therefore requires a serious rethink on the treatment of family members who have lost their EU law residence rights. The same applies to recognised extended family members. The arguments against expulsion are in fact far broader than previously understood and in the UK go far beyond the very limited provisions at paragraph 276ADE of the Immigration Rules. The UK re-entry ban rules do not on the face of it breach EU law as clearly as do the Irish rules but there is an argument to be had there should a family member seek return after removal.

  6. #326
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    20 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >>> UKVI update: Judicial reviews and injunctions: https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...TwaFCtIGAKt2N3

    Guidance on arranging removals for officers dealing with immigration enforcement matters within the UK.
    Changes from last version of this guidance
    New paragraph in section Third country and non-suspensive appeal (NSA) cases to clarify that a second notice period must be given if, after an asylum claim is certified, a subsequent human rights claim is separately certified.

    Section heading level adjusted for ‘Third country and non-suspensive appeal (NSA) cases’ and ‘Special arrangements (including charter flights)’ to show they are not part of section Cases where the removal window should not be used.

  7. #327
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    23 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >> Upper Tribunal: no reason to change Sudan country guidance: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2019/282.html

    The Upper Tribunal in AAR & AA (Non-Arab Darfuris – return) Sudan [2019] UKUT 282 (IAC) has rejected a Home Office attempt to resume returns of non-Arab Darfuris to Sudan. The tribunal upheld its previous guidance, reaffirming the position that all non-Arab Darfuris are at risk of persecution in Sudan, and internal relocation to Khartoum is not an option.

    The tribunal allowed both appeals on asylum grounds, ignoring previous adverse credibility findings relating to the appellants’ accounts of treatment in Sudan. This is because non-Arab Darfuri asylum claims are based solely on ethnicity. Once this ground has been made out, everything else is irrelevant and they should be granted refugee status on that issue alone.

  8. #328
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    24 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >> Immigration Bill back on as the Supreme Court recalls Parliament

    Earlier today the Supreme Court handed down its judgment on whether the Prime Minister suspending Parliament for five weeks at a crucial time in the Brexit saga was legal.

    So the Immigration Bill is back. Prorogation, the particular form of suspension used, meant that it and most other pending legislation died on the vine and would have to start from scratch when Parliament returned. The effect of the Supreme Court finding that the prorogation was never legally valid is that these bills are actually alive and kicking, according to assorted experts on parliamentary procedure.

    The main purpose of the bill is to formally end the free movement rights of EU citizens. However, even if the bill is passed any time soon, this element will not be implemented for some time. After much fuss about nothing over the summer, the government has confirmed that free movement rules will remain largely in place until at least 2021.

    The bill also guarantees the unique rights of Irish citizens, explicitly exempting them from the need to have leave to enter or remain in the UK.

  9. #329
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    25 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >> > The current Home Office guidance on permission to work and volunteer for asylum seekers: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...nt-instruction

    Changes since the last version of the guidance:

    • updated to include reference to criminality and delay when considering permission to work applications
    • improved guidance on applying for permission to work to provide clarity for claimants on what is expected
    • updated information about the difference between working for a voluntary organisation and volunteering to make clearer that asylum seekers are able to volunteer
    • new guidance template applied, and section and paragraph numbering removed in line with guidance requirements
    The new section on volunteering is considerably clearer than the old version.

  10. #330
    Давно Тут! Аватар для Advocate
    Регистрация
    14.02.2011
    Адрес
    UK
    Сообщений
    2,971
    26 September 2019 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org – +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145023 (WhatsApp/Viber)

    >> > Court of Justice finds that self-employed women have maternity rights: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/documen...1&cid=15295724

    The Court of Justice of the European Union has had to find that self-employed EU citizens retain rights of residence during their maternity period. Why on earth the government of the United Kingdom tried to argue they did not is one of those mysteries to which we’ll probably never know the answer. Particularly when the outcome of the case — C 544/18 HMRC v Dakneviciute — seemed legally inevitable and Brexit has highlighted the need for security of residence rights for women.

Страница 33 из 39 ПерваяПервая ... 233132333435 ... ПоследняяПоследняя

Социальные закладки

Социальные закладки

Ваши права

  • Вы не можете создавать новые темы
  • Вы не можете отвечать в темах
  • Вы не можете прикреплять вложения
  • Вы не можете редактировать свои сообщения
  •