14 January 2021 – 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)
>>> Does the Irish Republic citizens require visas now to enter, live and work in the UK ?
The answer is "No" in most cases:
Section 3ZA of the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 states that:
"Irish citizens
(1)An Irish citizen does not require leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, unless subsection (2), (3) or (4) applies to that citizen."
>>> A student cannot sponsor a partner or children unless such a student is doing a postgraduate degree. This excludes undergraduate bachelor’s degrees as well as the sponsorship by the foreign government.
18 January 2021 – 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)
In BTT v R [2021] EWCA Crim 4 the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) required a man appealing a conviction for growing cannabis to give oral evidence about his account of human trafficking. It then relied on this evidence to depart from the Upper Tribunal’s decision that he was a victim of trafficking at the time he committed the offence and during the subsequent trial. The court commented:
"Having heard and seen the applicant give evidence, this Court is not really assisted by the decision of the Upper Tribunal which was dependent upon witness statements untested by cross-examination which put forward an account which cannot stand with what the applicant said in the witness box. Likewise, the expert evidence cannot lend credibility to the account which the applicant has now put forward."
A concerning case which suggests that the Court of Appeal might be becoming more reluctant to entertain criminal appeals by trafficking victims.
20 January 2021 – 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)
>>> Home Office can make exceptions to rules stopping asylum seekers working
The Upper Tribunal has declared the government’s strict policy on asylum seekers working to be unlawful insofar as it doesn’t mention that exceptions can be made. The case is R (C6) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR/1414/2020) and comes hard on the heels of a very similar decision by the High Court last month.
22 January 2021 – 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)
>>> Minor offence can trigger deportation, human rights court confirms
The European Court of Human Rights has confirmed that the final offence committed by someone before deportation action is taken against them does not need to be particularly significant if they have a history of serious offending. In Munir Johanna v Denmark (application no. 56803/18) and Khan v Denmark (application no. 26957/19) the court has confirmed the earlier decision of Miah v the United Kingdom (application no. 53080/07).
23 January 2021 – 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 distinction between a “claim” and an “application” was at the heart of the Upper Tribunal’s recent decision in Yerokun (Refusal of claim; Mujahid) Nigeria [2020] UKUT 377 (IAC).
Mr Yerokun made an application for permission to remain in the UK based on his human right to private and family life. This application was refused, but he was granted leave “outside the Immigration Rules” for a period of six months. Since his human rights application for a longer stay had been refused, he appealed. In 2018, the First-tier Tribunal agreed that he had a right of appeal against the refusal and proceeded to allow his appeal.
The Upper Tribunal has now reversed that decision on the basis that there is no right to appeal against the refusal of a human rights application, only against refusal of a human rights claim.
What’s the difference?
Section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 provides:
"A person (“P”) may appeal to the Tribunal where—
(a) the Secretary of State has decided to refuse a protection claim made by P,
(b) the Secretary of State has decided to refuse a human rights claim made by P, or
(c) the Secretary of State has decided to revoke P’s protection status."
It was not disputed that Mr Yerokun had made a human rights claim (i.e. a claim that removing him from the UK would breach his human rights). But that claim was not refused. It was accepted: he was granted permission to remain in the UK for six months. It was the application to stay for a longer period which was refused. As such, there was no right of appeal:
"A person who makes an application by reference to a claim seeks some particular benefit arising from the circumstances of his case. The decision-maker may recognise the circumstances but be disinclined to grant the particular benefit sought. There is nothing contradictory, therefore, in refusing the application while recognising (and so not refusing) the claim. The statute provides a right of appeal against refusals of claims… but it says nothing about a right of appeal against the refusal of an application. [Paragraph 12] "
This conclusion was reinforced by the fact that, under section 104(4B) of the 2002 Act, an appeal must be treated as abandoned if the appellant is granted permission whilst his appeal is pending:
"The effect of this is that if a person’s human rights claim is refused, and he appeals, the grant of a period of leave, however short, brings his appeal to an end. It is inconceivable that there was intended to be a right of appeal where the same grant was made before the appeal could be launched. [11] "
A similar issue arose in Mujahid [2020] UKUT 85 (IAC) which involved the Home Office refusing an application for indefinite leave to remain (a permanent visa) but granting limited leave (a temporary visa). There was also no right of appeal in that case. The only way to challenge such a refusal is the much more restrictive and expensive judicial review process.
The official headnote
The reasons given by the President in R (Mujahid) v First-tier Tribunal and SSHD [2020] UKUT 85 (IAC) are reinforced by two further factors:
(1) Under s 104(4A) a human rights appeal is deemed to be abandoned if a period of leave, however short, is granted after the appeal is brought. It is inconceivable that it was intended that a refusal of an application accompanied by a grant of leave was intended to generate a right of appeal.
(2) There is an inherent difference between an application and a claim and the refusal of the one does not imply or entail the refusal of the other, even where the application includes a claim.
23 January 2021 – 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)
Updated exceptional assurance visa expiry dates to 1 January 2021 and 28 February 2021.
Updated content under ‘If you intend to stay in the UK’ section:
"If you decide to stay in the UK, you should apply for the necessary permission to stay to regularise your stay. You’ll be able to submit an application form from within the UK, whereas you would usually need to apply for a visa from your home country.
You’ll need to meet the requirements of the route you’re applying for and pay the UK application fee.
The terms of your permission will remain the same until your application is decided. If you are switching into work or study routes you may be able to commence work or study whilst your application is under consideration, depending on the terms of your current permission.
You are also able to apply for leave to remain to regularise your stay if you have been issued with ‘exceptional assurance’. You must submit your application before the expiry of your ‘exceptional assurance’."
The guidance has been amended to reflect caselaw that where a decision is withdrawn section 3C resurrects from the time the decision is withdrawn. Where an out of time appeal or administrative review application is accepted section 3C resurrects from the time the decision to admit the out of time appeal or administrative review is made.
Updated EU Settlement Scheme: EU, other EEA and Swiss citizens and their family members with amendments to appendix EU made in statement of changes in immigration rules: HC 813, laid on 22 October 2020.
25 January 2021 – 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 Court of Appeal has held that there is no right based on procedural fairness for a migrant to be offered a chance to cure deficiencies in his or her Points Based System application before it is refused. The relevant case is the case of R (Taj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 19.
Care workers eligible for the EU Settlement Scheme seem unaware of the need to apply, a new report has found.
The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) surveyed 290 care home workers and found that as many as one in three had never heard of the Settlement Scheme, which allows EU citizens and their family members who apply before 30 June 2021 to remain in the UK despite Brexit.
27 January 2021 – 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)
>>> Sopra Steria - release of free appointments
The Sopra Steria has confimed that they have been releasing the free appointments at 09.00 rather than at midnight.
Stealing someone’s identity is not a “false representation” for the purposes of a 20-year long residence application, the Upper Tribunal has found. The case is Mahmood (paras. S-LTR.1.6. & S-LTR.4.2.; Scope) Bangladesh [2020] UKUT 376 (IAC).
The official headnote:
1. Paragraph S-LTR.1.6. of Appendix FM does not cover the use of false representations or a failure to disclose material facts in an application for leave to remain or in a previous application for immigration status.
2. Paragraph S-LTR.4.2. of Appendix FM is disjunctive with two independent clauses. The Home Office is consequently obliged to plead and reason her exercise of discretion to refuse an application for leave to remain based on one or both of those clauses.
3. The natural meaning of the first clause in paragraph S-LTR.4.2 requires that the false representation or the failure to disclose any material fact must have been made in support of a previous application and not be peripheral to that application.
4. The use of the words ‘required to support’ in the second clause in paragraph S-LTR.4.2 confirms a compulsory element to the use of the document(s) within the application or claim process, and the obtaining of the document(s) must be for the purposes of the immigration application or claim.
28 January 2021 – 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 enormous complexity of the UK Immigration Rules. Have a look at the Paragraph 298, for example, as an illustration of the irregular way/exception when "impossible for some is possible for the other". Go figure (c).
You might be able to ask for the decision on your visa or immigration application to be reviewed if you applied in the UK.
This is known as a ‘reconsideration request’. It isn’t a formal appeal or an administrative review. You can’t ask for a reconsideration if you have a right to an appeal or a review.
29 January 2021 – 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)
Ndwanyi (Permission to appeal; challenging decision on timeliness) Rwanda [2020] UKUT 378 (IAC) is about how a respondent can challenge a decision that an application for permission to appeal is in time, when in fact it is not in time.
In this case the Home Office had lost the appeal in the First-tier Tribunal and sought permission to appeal. They had 14 calendar days to do so. The decision was promulgated on 20 December 2019, which meant the deadline for filing the application for permission to appeal was 6 January 2020. The Home Office filed the application on 7 January 2020 and asked for an extension of time, saying that it did not have enough staff available over Christmas to apply on time.
A clerk put a sticker on the file confirming that the Home Office required a one-day extension of time. The judge who received the application countermanded this, wrongly believing that the Christmas and New Year bank holidays meant that the Home Office did not require an extension. He considered (and granted) the application as though it were in time.
Mr Ndwanyi asked the Upper Tribunal to refuse to hear the appeal because of the timeliness issue. The Home Office agreed that the permission application was out of time but that the Upper Tribunal itself could exercise discretion to extend the deadline.
The Upper Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to fix the judge’s decision because of the Appeals (Excluded Decisions) Order 2009 (SI 2009/275). President Lane also held that there is no jurisdiction to exercise the discretion to extend time enjoyed by the First-tier Tribunal if that tribunal has considered the issue of timeliness already and that it would be inappropriate to use the slip rule for this type of error.
As a result, the only option for challenging this type of decision is judicial review.
The official headnote:
"If a decision of the First-tier Tribunal that an application for permission to appeal was in time represents the clear and settled intention of the judge then, as it is an ‘excluded decision’ (see the Appeals (Excluded Decisions) Order 2009 (SI 2009/275, as amended), it may only be challenged by way of judicial review; that remains so even if both parties agree that the decision is wrong in law. Only if the judge has overlooked the question of timeliness and any explanation for delay will the grant be conditional upon the Upper Tribunal exercising a discretion to extend time (see Boktor and Wanis (late application for permission) Egypt [2011] UKUT 442 (IAC))."
The Home Office has confirmed that the special visa scheme for people from Hong Kong with British National (Overseas) citizenship opens for applications from 31 January 2021.
The application process is digital first: applicants with a biometric chip in their passport will be able to use a smartphone app, just like with the EU Settlement Scheme, rather than turn up to a visa appointment in person. This Covid-friendly process only starts up on 23 February, though. In that sense you could argue that the start of the scheme has in fact been delayed by a few weeks.
As a holding measure, BNO citizens have been able to get leave outside the Rules at the border since last summer. This allows people to enter and stay in the UK legally while waiting for the BNO visa scheme proper to begin. The Home Office has extended that concession until “after the route becomes fully digital”. So far, around 7,000 BNO citizens and their family members have been granted leave outside the Rules in this way.
The Home Office press release draws attention to the economic benefits expected from any influx of Hongkongers. While precise forecasting is impossible, the central estimate is that between 258,000 and 322,000 BNO citizens and their family members could come to the UK. “This”, the department proclaims, “would suggest a net benefit to the UK of between £2.4 billion and £2.9 billion over five years”.
02 February 2021 – 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)
In FA (Sudan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 59, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that someone applying to stay in the UK under the domestic abuse rules must have had permission to remain as a partner. This appeal was a bold challenge to the validity of that requirement, on the basis that it was discriminatory.
This decision leaves intact the bright-line rule that a migrant must have had a spouse or partner visa to be able to use the domestic abuse scheme. The route remains closed off to those with the wrong immigration history.
08 February 2021 – 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 Home Office have clarified the Covid Visa Concession Scheme (at the bottom of page 7). It is now clear that those granted 3 months leave outside the rules will not be prejudiced by that status in future applications e.g. Skilled Workers cannot normally have last held leave outside the rules.
"A commitment has been made to ensure family and private life applicants are not unduly affected by reasons beyond their control due to COVID-19. The pandemic may have caused disruption to travel plans, causing breaks in continuous lawful immigration status/residence requirements.
Due to the impact of COVID-19, some applicants seeking to start, extend or complete a route to settlement on the basis of family or private life, may be unable to meet the immigration status/continuous residence eligibility requirements of Appendix FM. This may be due to travel restrictions, closure or inaccessibility to a visa application centre (VAC) or illness.
Ordinarily, there is no flexibility for you to exercise discretion in allowing the lawful immigration status and continuous residence eligibility requirements to be met. However, you may exercise discretion to allow an applicant to start, stay on (extend – apply for further leave) or complete a route to settlement despite them being in the UK as a visitor or with leave of six-months or less, in-country or overseas for a short period without leave, where it is shown that they were not able to travel or apply due to COVID-19 between March and 31 August 2020.
Any visitor whose period of leave expires beyond 31 August 2020, is still allowed to make their application from within the UK where they would usually need to apply for a visa from their home country on a limited, case by case basis. We will expect applicants to prove that their application is urgent or for them to provide a valid reason why they cannot apply from outside the UK as a result of COVID-19.
If a person is in the UK with 6 months’ leave as a fiancé, fiancée or proposed civil partner and their wedding or civil ceremony has been delayed due to coronavirus they may be granted additional time to stay, also known as ‘exceptional assurance’, to complete their wedding or civil partnership if their ceremony has been disrupted by COVID-19. Any period of stay under exceptional assurance will extend the same conditions as their initial leave granted under this route.
You can disregard a short period of time spent overseas where leave to enter or remain expired and an applicant could not return to the UK to renew their leave due to COVID-19, provided an applicant extends their leave and/or makes an application for leave to enter as soon as practicable. The break in continuous residence may be because a VAC was closed or inaccessible, and the applicant was unable to apply for further leave to enter – where they should have been applying for leave to remain, or the applicant returned to the UK as a visitor or following a visa waiver or carrier waiver in order to complete an application for further leave once back in the UK. In some cases, an applicant with leave, applying for further leave or ready to apply for settlement, may not have been able to travel back to the UK, but instead was able to access a VAC to apply for indefinite leave. Appendix FM would not ordinarily allow for a period of leave to enter or remain, followed by another period of leave to enter in order to be eligible to apply for settlement after five-years. However, where the application was made in order to maintain a continuous period of lawful residence, you may take that period of leave to enter into account.
You may disregard a period of leave outside the Immigration Rules granted by Border Force to allow an applicant to re-enter the UK following a period of being stranded overseas due to COVID-19 when their leave expired between 1 March 2020 and 31 May 2021.
"Instruction for handling cases which raise the impact of the 2020/21 COVID-19 pandemic as grounds for not meeting the minimum income requirement in an entry clearance, leave to remain or indefinite leave to remain applications under the family Immigration Rules.
This guidance sets out the approach you must take over defined periods, when deciding a case, to ensure applicants are not disadvantaged as a result of circumstances beyond their control because of COVID-19.
Income received via the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme or the Coronavirus Self-Employment Income Support Scheme can count as employment or self-employment income. Where there is evidence of a temporary loss of income due to COVID-19 during the period 1 March 2020 and 31 May 2021 you will apply the following concessions:
• a temporary loss of employment income between 1 March and 31 May 2021 due to COVID-19, will be disregarded provided the minimum income requirement was met for at least 6 months immediately prior to the date the income was lost - this is for a loss of employment income between 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2021 due to COVID-19 an applicant or sponsor furloughed under the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme will be deemed as earning 100% of their salary
• a temporary loss of annual income due to COVID-19 between 1 March 2020 and 31 May2021 will generally be disregarded for self-employment income, along with the impact on employment income from the same period for future applications.
• evidential flexibility may be applied where an applicant or sponsor experiences difficulty accessing specified evidence due to COVID-19 restrictions
10 February 2021 – 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)
As of yesterday, the nationality requirement is no more. This is thanks to the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2021 (SI 2021 No. 40 (L. 1)), the relevant provisions of which came into force on 8 February 2021.
In the latest round of the legal saga involving Egyptian dissident Yasser Al-Siri, the Court of Appeal has ruled that the Home Office acted unlawfully in only granting him restricted leave to remain after an earlier First-tier Tribunal decision that he is a refugee. There was, the court found, no fresh evidence allowing the Home Office to get around the First-tier Tribunal’s decision (the Ladd v Marshall test). The case is Al-Siri v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 113.
11 February 2021 – 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)
You can apply for a faster decision on certain visa applications or applications to settle in the UK.
The table lists the eligible visas and whether you can pay to get a decision:
- within 5 working days
- by the end of the next working day
>>> Home Office given 48 hours to release immigration detainee despite coronavirus: R (SH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 177 (Admin)
In an interim relief decision the High Court has ordered the release of an immigration detainee within 48 hours, indicating that judges will not allow the Home Office to use the pandemic as cover to justify long “grace period” delays in releasing detainees. As regular readers and practitioners know, those delays were common even before the pandemic.
A High Court judge has raised the prospect of contempt of court proceedings against the Home Secretary, Priti Patel, after her department breached a mandatory injunction. Mr Justice Chamberlain made the ominous comments in the case of Mohammad v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 240 (Admin).
12 February 2021 – 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)
From 20 January we have reintroduced the next working day Super Priority (SPV) service and the 5 working day Priority (PV) to in-country work and student application routes.
All other in-country immigration application routes will continue to offer a standard service at this time. The service will be reintroduced to further in-country routes as and when those factors allow.
>>> Administrative fee for cancelling appointments
Sopra Steria have introduced a £10.00 admin free for cancelling appointments, even where it is cancelled more than 48 hours before the appointment. This is preventing applicants from being able to search for better appointment availability.
>>> 240 days to submit the biometrics
From the UK BA:
Completing the application and booking a UKVCAS appointment
Customers are reminded that once they have completed their application on Access UK and have been transferred to the UKVCAS website, that they have 240 days to submit their biometrics.
If customers do not complete their biometric enrolment within 240 days their application will be closed, and they will need to recommence their application process.
In R (Mozumder) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 138, the Court of Appeal has dealt with an unusual costs issue arising from the furore over alleged cheating in English language tests.
The issue was how costs should be apportioned from a judicial review which challenged removal on the ground that an out-of-country appeal was not an effective remedy where the individual had been accused of cheating on his English language test. After the judicial review, the appellant had subsequently made a separate appeal against removal on the basis of his human rights and the First-tier Tribunal found that he had not cheated. The Court of Appeal decided that it could take into account the later tribunal decision, even though it had not been available to the judge at first instance, and that therefore the appellant had been successful and was entitled to his costs:
"If Mr Mozumder had been found by the FTT judge to have cheated and thus had his appeal rejected I for my part would have been extremely reluctant to award him any costs at all. Since it has now been held by the appropriate tribunal that he had not cheated, I consider he should be treated as the winner in substance as well as on the procedural issue and should be awarded his costs of the judicial review which led to that result being achieved."
15 February 2021 – 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)
Briefly, the Home Office has no power to cancel indefinite leave to remain (ILR) under Article 13 of the Immigration (Leave to Enter & Remain) Order 2000.
The judgment brings into sharp focus how complex primary and secondary immigration legislation has become. The Law Commission has tried to simplify the Immigration Rules, but there is a case for attempting the same with the underlying legislation from which the Rules actually derive.
16 February 2021 – 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)
>>> Can an illiterate spouse join a British partner in the UK ?
The answer is probably, "No".
The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge brought against the introduction of pre-entry English language testing for spouses seeking to enter the UK as the family members of British citizens and those present and settled in the UK. The formal title of the case is R (on the applications of Ali and Bibi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 68 but is will be known generally as just Ali and Bibi: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2013-0270.html
18 February 2021 – 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)
>>> EU citizens with the EU pre-settled status can sponsor family members under Appendix FM
Since 31 December 2020, the list of people who can sponsor a family member under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules has included those who are “in the UK with limited leave under Appendix EU, in accordance with paragraph GEN 1.3(d)”.
As the name suggests, GEN 1.3(d) is found in the “General” section of Appendix FM. It says:
"References to a person being “in the UK with limited leave under Appendix EU” mean an EEA national in the UK who holds valid limited leave to enter or remain granted under paragraph EU3 of Appendix EU to these Rules on the basis of meeting condition 1 in paragraph EU14 of that Appendix."
Condition 1 of paragraph EU14 of Appendix EU is what people have to satisfy to be granted pre-settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme. The upshot is that people with pre-settled status can now use Appendix FM to sponsor family members. This applies to all family visa categories covered by Appendix FM, even “parent of a child” and adult dependent relatives applications, as pre-settled status is now a qualifying status for the child’s other parent where the child does not live with the applicant.
There are also sponsorship provisions for Turkish workers and businesspeople granted limited leave under Appendix ECAA Extension of Stay, but only for partner visas.
The government wants to restrict the ability of migrants to resist removal from the UK by invoking their right not to suffer inhuman or degrading treatment, the Justice Secretary has said. In an interview with the Daily Mail, Robert Buckland “confirmed plans to restrict the use of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights” in immigration and asylum cases.
22 February 2021 – 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 grace period for overstayers in paragraph 39E of the Immigration Rules cannot be relied on twice. This, in short, is the conclusion of the Court of Appeal in Kalsi & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 184.
23 February 2021 – 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 Upper Tribunal in QC (verification of documents; Mibanga duty) China [2021] UKUT 33 (IAC) has given useful guidance on how to approach documentary evidence submitted by asylum appellants.
The tribunal has also clarified the circumstances in which Home Office must make enquiries to verify an appellant’s documentary evidence before rejecting it as false (a ‘verification obligation’). In cases where the verification obligation arises, but the Home Office doesn’t do anything to verify the document’s authenticity, any complaints about whether the document is genuine will be ignored by the tribunal.
24 February 2021 – 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)
An update on the Fratila case, which in December 2020 saw the Court of Appeal hand down a very significant decision improving access to benefits such as Universal Credit for EU citizens with pre-settled status. A stay on that decision (i.e. it didn’t take legal effect) was in place until 26 February 2021 while the government considered an appeal. Permission for that appeal has now been granted by the Supreme Court and the stay extended until it is resolved.
The Court of Justice of the European Union is also due to consider the same legal point, after a case was referred to it on 30 December 2020 by a tribunal in Northern Ireland. That could complicate things: the Supreme Court may, for example, want to wait for that decision before handing down its own. On the other hand, the EU case could represent a second bite at the cherry should the Supreme Court side with the government: “the CJEU’s ruling on a reference made by a UK court or tribunal (just) before the end of transition, will be binding on all UK courts”.
02 March 2021 – 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)
>>> Lengthy absences from the UK can put EU settled status at risk
People with pre-settled status, in particular, need to be aware of the absence rules. If they have been outside the UK for more than six months in any 12-month period, they will now only be able to upgrade to settled status if they returned to the UK before 31 December 2020.
04 March 2021 – 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 UK Government intends to introduece new routes (aka HSMP/Tier 1 (General) and modify the existing route (Innovator, Global Talent etc)
Namely:
" 2.140 High-skilled migration – The government is modernising the immigration system to help the UK attract and retain the most highly skilled, globally mobile talent – particularly in academia, science, research and technology – from around the world. This will drive innovation, and support UK jobs and growth. To do this, the government will:
• introduce, by March 2022, an elite points-based visa. Within this visa there will be a ‘scaleup’ stream, enabling those with a job offer from a recognised UK scale-up to qualify for a fast-track visa
• reform the Global Talent visa, including to allow holders of international prizes and winners of scholarships and programmes for early promise to automatically qualify
• review the Innovator visa to make it easier for those with the skills and experience to found an innovative business to obtain a visa
• launch the new Global Business Mobility visa by spring 2022 for overseas businesses to establish a presence or transfer staff to the UK
• provide practical support to small firms that are using the visa system for the first time
• modernise the immigration sponsorship system to make it easier to use. The government will publish a delivery roadmap in the summer
• establish a global outreach strategy by expanding the Global Entrepreneur Programme, marketing the UK’s visa offering and explore building an overseas talent network"
Special treatment for fast-growing “scale-up” companies — the evolved form of a “start-up” — was trailed ahead of the Budget and seems to be aimed at financial technology companies specifically. The Kalifa Review of the UK’s offer to fintech firms, published last week and strongly endorsed by the Treasury, recommended:
"A ‘Fintech Scaleup Stream’ within the Global Talent (or proposed Unsponsored) route… Those with a job offer at the required skills level (RQF6) from a recognised UK fintech scaleup would automatically qualify for the Fintech ScaleUp Stream under either the Global Talent, or proposed Unsponsored Route, without the need for third party endorsement. This would be a world-leading offering and would position the UK as the top destination for the most globally talented in the sector."
It sounds as though the government has plumped for making the “scale-up stream” a subset of a new unsponsored route rather than Global Talent. The broader “elite points-based visa” that it would sit within sounds like a reference to the proposed revival of an unsponsored work route, similar to the old Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP), that was mooted but kicked into the long grass last year. Then again, the requirement for a job offer is an odd fit for an “unsponsored” route, so the one will have to see how this shakes out. Perhaps the one will end up with a halfway house, where the scale-up visa application will require proof of a job offer but the employer won’t need a full-on sponsor licence.
Reviewing the Innovator route is welcome as it has so far been a disaster. Sorting out a visa that overseas entrepreneurs don’t laugh at in disbelief is probably a necessary condition for successfully “marketing the UK’s visa offering” as mentioned in the final bullet point. Likewise, expanding eligibility for Global Talent is a positive step, although it’s only a year since the last “reform” of this route.
Finally, the “new Global Business Mobility visa” sounds like a rebrand of the Representative of an Overseas Business route.
None of this will happen today or tomorrow; the one can expect the changes to be implemented via statements of changes to the Immigration Rules in the usual way.
08 March 2021 – 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)
Amended ‘If you’re in the UK’ section, updating exceptional assurance visa or leave expiry dates to between 1 March 2021 and 31 March 2021.
Updated guidance in the ‘if you intend to stay in the UK’ section.
09 March 2021 – 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)
>>> Policy on fee waivers for entry clearance is unlawful, government concedes
In another blow for the Home Office on visa application fees, the department has been forced to concede that its policy on fee waivers for entry clearance applications is unlawful.
The policy is expected to be changed now.
The impending policy change offers a ray of hope. Many applicants have been struggling in a Catch-22 situation for years: unable to enter the UK because of not being able to pay the visa application fee, and unable to get a waiver for the application fee because of being outside the UK. For many people stuck in this situation, the change can’t come soon enough – especially after a year of coronavirus heartache and financial turmoil.
The Home Office hasn’t yet said when the new policy will be published – hopefully soon, given that it has conceded that the current policy (still up on the Home Office website) is unlawful. But it has said that in the meantime, urgent fee waiver applications will be reviewed. Anyone making an application at this stage should submit evidence that they cannot afford the application fee, and evidence that their case requires urgent consideration.
10 March 2021 – 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)
>>> Can an EEA frontier worker switch into a new immigration category in-country ?
The Home Office has confirmed that frontier workers can switch to other immigration categories in the UK (as long as they meet eligibility requirements of the category they wish to switch into).
The Home Office has also confirmed that if an EEA national holds frontier working status but wishes to travel to the UK for a purpose other than work (for example, a recreational visit) they will be admitted to the UK as a visitor under the Immigration Rules, and not as a frontier worker. It remains to be seen how this policy will be implemented in practice.
15 March 2021 – 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)
>>> Can an income from the child who has turned 18 be taken into account (UK Spouse visas) ?
Apparently, the answer is "yes":
Appendix FM-SE:
"1(b)
(ii) income from a dependent child who has turned 18, remains in the same UK household as the applicant and continues to be counted towards the financial requirement under Appendix FM;"
The new Graduate route will open for applications on 1 July 2021. Eligible students holding a Tier 4 or Student visa valid on or after 1 July 2021 will have the opportunity apply to stay in the UK for 2 years (3 years for doctoral students) to work or seek employment.
The UK has also extended the coronavirus concessions for students who so far have been unable to travel to the UK. Students who started their studies in Autumn 2020 will now need to be in the UK by 21 June 2021 to be eligible to apply under the Graduate route. Students starting their studies in January/February 2021 required to be in the UK by 27 September 2021.
>>> IDV app continues to be offered to eligible in-country Students
Applicants applying in the UK under the student route, and whose biometrics have been recorded in a previous application, continue be assessed by UK Visas & Immigration (UKVI) for eligibility to use the IDV app. The IDV app is free and enables applicants to submit application information to UKVI without having to book or attend an appointment with UK Visa & Citizenship Applications Services (UKVCAS). Once UKVI have undertaken this eligibility assessment, UKVCAS will contact applicants to inform them either use the IDV app or to book an appointment at a UKVCAS Service Point.
The IDV app is currently only being used for eligible Tier 4 applicants in the UK. The IDV app cannot be used for other routes, including all applications for replacement biometric residence cards.
16 March 2021 – 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 report of the Independent Review of Administrative Law will be published this week and the Justice Secretary will on Thursday set out plans for reducing the use of judicial review in immigration cases, the Telegraph reports.
The paper says that those plans include an end to Cart/Eba judicial reviews of the Upper Tribunal’s refusal to grant permission for an appeal to itself:
"One plan would see lawyers prevented from launching judicial reviews of Upper Tribunal immigration decisions, bringing the system back in line with previous years.
A new law will be passed to overturn a 2012 Supreme Court ruling which allowed these cases to be subject to judicial review."
This would be only “the first salvo from the Government in a major crackdown on so-called ‘meritless’ immigration and asylum claims expected in coming weeks”. Previous reports have suggested that the government also wants to restrict migrants’ rights under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Judicial review applications to the UTIAC have fallen every year since 2015/16, from 15,800 then to 5,700 last year.
23 March 2021 – 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)
This was updated on 22 March 2021 with further details about exemptions for essential and emergency work and is on GOV.UK here. This page was also updated on 19 March to exempt aviation and maritime crew from red list country quarantine measures and remove Portugal (including Madeira and the Azores) from the red list.
Information and guidance on handling visa applications made outside the UK published on GOV.UK and archived here. This was updated on 15 March 2021 to add a call out box to explain that the current guidance for the discretion to waive a fee in other cases is being revised and not currently operational, but can still apply.
Version 17 of this guidance has been published on GOV.UK. The guidance has been updated to reflect changes arising at the end of the transition period after the UK’s exit from the EU.
A new version of the guidance 'Re-entry bans' as been published on GOV.UK.
>>> Three persons win appeals against losing British citizenship
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) has allowed the appeals of three people who were deprived of their British citizenship following allegations that they had travelled to Syria and posed a threat to national security.
Those interested in the details can search for "C3, C4 & C7 v Secretary of State for the Home Department (SC/167/2020, SC/168/2020 and SC/171/2020)".
Комментарии
>>> Does the Irish Republic citizens require visas now to enter, live and work in the UK ?
The answer is "No" in most cases:
Section 3ZA of the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 states that:
"Irish citizens
(1)An Irish citizen does not require leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, unless subsection (2), (3) or (4) applies to that citizen."
>>> A student cannot sponsor a partner or children unless such a student is doing a postgraduate degree. This excludes undergraduate bachelor’s degrees as well as the sponsorship by the foreign government.
You have ben warned !
>>> Criminal Court of Appeal ignores immigration judge’s trafficking determination: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/4.html
In BTT v R [2021] EWCA Crim 4 the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) required a man appealing a conviction for growing cannabis to give oral evidence about his account of human trafficking. It then relied on this evidence to depart from the Upper Tribunal’s decision that he was a victim of trafficking at the time he committed the offence and during the subsequent trial. The court commented:
"Having heard and seen the applicant give evidence, this Court is not really assisted by the decision of the Upper Tribunal which was dependent upon witness statements untested by cross-examination which put forward an account which cannot stand with what the applicant said in the witness box. Likewise, the expert evidence cannot lend credibility to the account which the applicant has now put forward."
A concerning case which suggests that the Court of Appeal might be becoming more reluctant to entertain criminal appeals by trafficking victims.
>>> Home Office can make exceptions to rules stopping asylum seekers working
The Upper Tribunal has declared the government’s strict policy on asylum seekers working to be unlawful insofar as it doesn’t mention that exceptions can be made. The case is R (C6) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR/1414/2020) and comes hard on the heels of a very similar decision by the High Court last month.
>>> Minor offence can trigger deportation, human rights court confirms
The European Court of Human Rights has confirmed that the final offence committed by someone before deportation action is taken against them does not need to be particularly significant if they have a history of serious offending. In Munir Johanna v Denmark (application no. 56803/18) and Khan v Denmark (application no. 26957/19) the court has confirmed the earlier decision of Miah v the United Kingdom (application no. 53080/07).
>>> When can an immigration decision involving human rights be appealed? https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/377.html
The distinction between a “claim” and an “application” was at the heart of the Upper Tribunal’s recent decision in Yerokun (Refusal of claim; Mujahid) Nigeria [2020] UKUT 377 (IAC).
Mr Yerokun made an application for permission to remain in the UK based on his human right to private and family life. This application was refused, but he was granted leave “outside the Immigration Rules” for a period of six months. Since his human rights application for a longer stay had been refused, he appealed. In 2018, the First-tier Tribunal agreed that he had a right of appeal against the refusal and proceeded to allow his appeal.
The Upper Tribunal has now reversed that decision on the basis that there is no right to appeal against the refusal of a human rights application, only against refusal of a human rights claim.
What’s the difference?
Section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 provides:
"A person (“P”) may appeal to the Tribunal where—
(a) the Secretary of State has decided to refuse a protection claim made by P,
(b) the Secretary of State has decided to refuse a human rights claim made by P, or
(c) the Secretary of State has decided to revoke P’s protection status."
It was not disputed that Mr Yerokun had made a human rights claim (i.e. a claim that removing him from the UK would breach his human rights). But that claim was not refused. It was accepted: he was granted permission to remain in the UK for six months. It was the application to stay for a longer period which was refused. As such, there was no right of appeal:
"A person who makes an application by reference to a claim seeks some particular benefit arising from the circumstances of his case. The decision-maker may recognise the circumstances but be disinclined to grant the particular benefit sought. There is nothing contradictory, therefore, in refusing the application while recognising (and so not refusing) the claim. The statute provides a right of appeal against refusals of claims… but it says nothing about a right of appeal against the refusal of an application. [Paragraph 12] "
This conclusion was reinforced by the fact that, under section 104(4B) of the 2002 Act, an appeal must be treated as abandoned if the appellant is granted permission whilst his appeal is pending:
"The effect of this is that if a person’s human rights claim is refused, and he appeals, the grant of a period of leave, however short, brings his appeal to an end. It is inconceivable that there was intended to be a right of appeal where the same grant was made before the appeal could be launched. [11] "
A similar issue arose in Mujahid [2020] UKUT 85 (IAC) which involved the Home Office refusing an application for indefinite leave to remain (a permanent visa) but granting limited leave (a temporary visa). There was also no right of appeal in that case. The only way to challenge such a refusal is the much more restrictive and expensive judicial review process.
The official headnote
The reasons given by the President in R (Mujahid) v First-tier Tribunal and SSHD [2020] UKUT 85 (IAC) are reinforced by two further factors:
(1) Under s 104(4A) a human rights appeal is deemed to be abandoned if a period of leave, however short, is granted after the appeal is brought. It is inconceivable that it was intended that a refusal of an application accompanied by a grant of leave was intended to generate a right of appeal.
(2) There is an inherent difference between an application and a claim and the refusal of the one does not imply or entail the refusal of the other, even where the application includes a claim.
>>> Coronavirus (COVID-19): advice for UK visa applicants and temporary UK residents: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-advice-for-uk-visa-applicants-and-temporary-uk-residents?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=5dd1eccb-71c6-4194-b4b4-2ef3aef3d22f&utm_content=daily
Updated exceptional assurance visa expiry dates to 1 January 2021 and 28 February 2021.
Updated content under ‘If you intend to stay in the UK’ section:
"If you decide to stay in the UK, you should apply for the necessary permission to stay to regularise your stay. You’ll be able to submit an application form from within the UK, whereas you would usually need to apply for a visa from your home country.
You’ll need to meet the requirements of the route you’re applying for and pay the UK application fee.
The terms of your permission will remain the same until your application is decided. If you are switching into work or study routes you may be able to commence work or study whilst your application is under consideration, depending on the terms of your current permission.
You are also able to apply for leave to remain to regularise your stay if you have been issued with ‘exceptional assurance’. You must submit your application before the expiry of your ‘exceptional assurance’."
>>> 3C and 3D leave
Immigration staff guidance on how to prevent an individual from becoming an overstayer while they are awaiting or appealing a decision: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/3c-and-3d-leave?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=687bbb87-7e80-402e-8bc6-c851d1237f98&utm_content=daily
The guidance has been amended to reflect caselaw that where a decision is withdrawn section 3C resurrects from the time the decision is withdrawn. Where an out of time appeal or administrative review application is accepted section 3C resurrects from the time the decision to admit the out of time appeal or administrative review is made.
>>> EU Settlement Scheme caseworker guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/eu-settlement-scheme-caseworker-guidance?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=a7a68fca-8810-4b1c-a0de-d2bc104fb293&utm_content=daily
Updated EU Settlement Scheme: EU, other EEA and Swiss citizens and their family members with amendments to appendix EU made in statement of changes in immigration rules: HC 813, laid on 22 October 2020.
>>> Global Talent caseworker guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/global-talent-appendix-w-workers?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=3ed14d10-b08f-4f45-89a4-44ef947837c7&utm_content=daily
Simplified stage 2 application form guidance in key facts, updated Isle of Man guidance, and redirected hyperlinks to appropriate government guidance.
>> Points-based system: evidential flexibility: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/points-based-system-evidential-flexibility?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=28342015-69f7-409e-9a37-492d45f36c34&utm_content=daily
Changes made to reflect the Immigration Rules made in October 2020.
>>> Immigration Skills Charge process guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-skills-charge-process-guidance?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=522d6e14-5190-4614-947f-83aee064f15c&utm_content=daily
Updated guidance on who is exempt from paying the immigration skills charge, priority visa details and the ISC refund process.
>> Criminal investigation: sham marriage: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/criminal-investigation-sham-marriage?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=30e98ae9-8294-42fe-ac0d-da5922c0e77d&utm_content=daily
Revised to include up-to-date definition of sham marriage, update of links to legislation and guidance.
>>> Procedural unfairness arguments unlikely to help in Points Based System refusals: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/19.html
The Court of Appeal has held that there is no right based on procedural fairness for a migrant to be offered a chance to cure deficiencies in his or her Points Based System application before it is refused. The relevant case is the case of R (Taj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 19.
>>> Care home workers at risk of missing out on EU settled status: https://www.jcwi.org.uk/when-the-clapping-stops-eu-care-workers-after-brexit
Care workers eligible for the EU Settlement Scheme seem unaware of the need to apply, a new report has found.
The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) surveyed 290 care home workers and found that as many as one in three had never heard of the Settlement Scheme, which allows EU citizens and their family members who apply before 30 June 2021 to remain in the UK despite Brexit.
>>> Sopra Steria - release of free appointments
The Sopra Steria has confimed that they have been releasing the free appointments at 09.00 rather than at midnight.
>>> A person who lived in UK under assumed identity for over a decade wins right to stay: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/376.html
Stealing someone’s identity is not a “false representation” for the purposes of a 20-year long residence application, the Upper Tribunal has found. The case is Mahmood (paras. S-LTR.1.6. & S-LTR.4.2.; Scope) Bangladesh [2020] UKUT 376 (IAC).
The official headnote:
1. Paragraph S-LTR.1.6. of Appendix FM does not cover the use of false representations or a failure to disclose material facts in an application for leave to remain or in a previous application for immigration status.
2. Paragraph S-LTR.4.2. of Appendix FM is disjunctive with two independent clauses. The Home Office is consequently obliged to plead and reason her exercise of discretion to refuse an application for leave to remain based on one or both of those clauses.
3. The natural meaning of the first clause in paragraph S-LTR.4.2 requires that the false representation or the failure to disclose any material fact must have been made in support of a previous application and not be peripheral to that application.
4. The use of the words ‘required to support’ in the second clause in paragraph S-LTR.4.2 confirms a compulsory element to the use of the document(s) within the application or claim process, and the obtaining of the document(s) must be for the purposes of the immigration application or claim.
>>> Some overstayers (children) may be eligible for Settlement (ILR): https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-part-8-family-members#requirements-for-indefinite-leave-to-remain-in-the-united-kingdom-as-the-child-of-a-parent-parents-or-a-relative-present-and-settled-or-being-admitted-for-settlement-in-the-united-kingdom
Overstayers may apply for ILR under Para 298.
The enormous complexity of the UK Immigration Rules. Have a look at the Paragraph 298, for example, as an illustration of the irregular way/exception when "impossible for some is possible for the other". Go figure (c).
>>> Visa and immigration reconsideration requests: https://www.gov.uk/visa-and-immigration-reconsideration-requests
You might be able to ask for the decision on your visa or immigration application to be reviewed if you applied in the UK.
This is known as a ‘reconsideration request’. It isn’t a formal appeal or an administrative review. You can’t ask for a reconsideration if you have a right to an appeal or a review.
>>> Upper Tribunal has no jurisdiction to correct appeal deadline error: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/378.html
Ndwanyi (Permission to appeal; challenging decision on timeliness) Rwanda [2020] UKUT 378 (IAC) is about how a respondent can challenge a decision that an application for permission to appeal is in time, when in fact it is not in time.
In this case the Home Office had lost the appeal in the First-tier Tribunal and sought permission to appeal. They had 14 calendar days to do so. The decision was promulgated on 20 December 2019, which meant the deadline for filing the application for permission to appeal was 6 January 2020. The Home Office filed the application on 7 January 2020 and asked for an extension of time, saying that it did not have enough staff available over Christmas to apply on time.
A clerk put a sticker on the file confirming that the Home Office required a one-day extension of time. The judge who received the application countermanded this, wrongly believing that the Christmas and New Year bank holidays meant that the Home Office did not require an extension. He considered (and granted) the application as though it were in time.
Mr Ndwanyi asked the Upper Tribunal to refuse to hear the appeal because of the timeliness issue. The Home Office agreed that the permission application was out of time but that the Upper Tribunal itself could exercise discretion to extend the deadline.
The Upper Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to fix the judge’s decision because of the Appeals (Excluded Decisions) Order 2009 (SI 2009/275). President Lane also held that there is no jurisdiction to exercise the discretion to extend time enjoyed by the First-tier Tribunal if that tribunal has considered the issue of timeliness already and that it would be inappropriate to use the slip rule for this type of error.
As a result, the only option for challenging this type of decision is judicial review.
The official headnote:
"If a decision of the First-tier Tribunal that an application for permission to appeal was in time represents the clear and settled intention of the judge then, as it is an ‘excluded decision’ (see the Appeals (Excluded Decisions) Order 2009 (SI 2009/275, as amended), it may only be challenged by way of judicial review; that remains so even if both parties agree that the decision is wrong in law. Only if the judge has overlooked the question of timeliness and any explanation for delay will the grant be conditional upon the Upper Tribunal exercising a discretion to extend time (see Boktor and Wanis (late application for permission) Egypt [2011] UKUT 442 (IAC))."
>>> BNO visa app launches in February 2021: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hong-kong-bno-visa-uk-government-to-honour-historic-commitment
The Home Office has confirmed that the special visa scheme for people from Hong Kong with British National (Overseas) citizenship opens for applications from 31 January 2021.
The application process is digital first: applicants with a biometric chip in their passport will be able to use a smartphone app, just like with the EU Settlement Scheme, rather than turn up to a visa appointment in person. This Covid-friendly process only starts up on 23 February, though. In that sense you could argue that the start of the scheme has in fact been delayed by a few weeks.
As a holding measure, BNO citizens have been able to get leave outside the Rules at the border since last summer. This allows people to enter and stay in the UK legally while waiting for the BNO visa scheme proper to begin. The Home Office has extended that concession until “after the route becomes fully digital”. So far, around 7,000 BNO citizens and their family members have been granted leave outside the Rules in this way.
The Home Office press release draws attention to the economic benefits expected from any influx of Hongkongers. While precise forecasting is impossible, the central estimate is that between 258,000 and 322,000 BNO citizens and their family members could come to the UK. “This”, the department proclaims, “would suggest a net benefit to the UK of between £2.4 billion and £2.9 billion over five years”.
>>> Appeal judges reject challenge to domestic abuse policy: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/59.html
In FA (Sudan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 59, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that someone applying to stay in the UK under the domestic abuse rules must have had permission to remain as a partner. This appeal was a bold challenge to the validity of that requirement, on the basis that it was discriminatory.
This decision leaves intact the bright-line rule that a migrant must have had a spouse or partner visa to be able to use the domestic abuse scheme. The route remains closed off to those with the wrong immigration history.
>>> Home Office immigration and nationality fees: 31 January 2021: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visa-regulations-revised-table/home-office-immigration-and-nationality-fees-31-january-2021
Updated Home Office immigration and nationality fees from 31 January 2021.
>>> Coronavirus (COVID-19): Covid Visa Concession Scheme (CVCS): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-covid-visa-concession-scheme-cvcs?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=7a537abf-dc14-4599-8e3a-2503063f8799&utm_content=daily
The Home Office have clarified the Covid Visa Concession Scheme (at the bottom of page 7). It is now clear that those granted 3 months leave outside the rules will not be prejudiced by that status in future applications e.g. Skilled Workers cannot normally have last held leave outside the rules.
>>> Family life (as a partner or parent), private life and exceptional circumstances : https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/family-life-as-a-partner-or-parent-private-life-and-exceptional-circumstance?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=ece9d335-d6d3-4130-b326-987a4a84232a&utm_content=daily
Updated covid concessions.
"A commitment has been made to ensure family and private life applicants are not unduly affected by reasons beyond their control due to COVID-19. The pandemic may have caused disruption to travel plans, causing breaks in continuous lawful immigration status/residence requirements.
Due to the impact of COVID-19, some applicants seeking to start, extend or complete a route to settlement on the basis of family or private life, may be unable to meet the immigration status/continuous residence eligibility requirements of Appendix FM. This may be due to travel restrictions, closure or inaccessibility to a visa application centre (VAC) or illness.
Ordinarily, there is no flexibility for you to exercise discretion in allowing the lawful immigration status and continuous residence eligibility requirements to be met. However, you may exercise discretion to allow an applicant to start, stay on (extend – apply for further leave) or complete a route to settlement despite them being in the UK as a visitor or with leave of six-months or less, in-country or overseas for a short period without leave, where it is shown that they were not able to travel or apply due to COVID-19 between March and 31 August 2020.
Any visitor whose period of leave expires beyond 31 August 2020, is still allowed to make their application from within the UK where they would usually need to apply for a visa from their home country on a limited, case by case basis. We will expect applicants to prove that their application is urgent or for them to provide a valid reason why they cannot apply from outside the UK as a result of COVID-19.
If a person is in the UK with 6 months’ leave as a fiancé, fiancée or proposed civil partner and their wedding or civil ceremony has been delayed due to coronavirus they may be granted additional time to stay, also known as ‘exceptional assurance’, to complete their wedding or civil partnership if their ceremony has been disrupted by COVID-19. Any period of stay under exceptional assurance will extend the same conditions as their initial leave granted under this route.
You can disregard a short period of time spent overseas where leave to enter or remain expired and an applicant could not return to the UK to renew their leave due to COVID-19, provided an applicant extends their leave and/or makes an application for leave to enter as soon as practicable. The break in continuous residence may be because a VAC was closed or inaccessible, and the applicant was unable to apply for further leave to enter – where they should have been applying for leave to remain, or the applicant returned to the UK as a visitor or following a visa waiver or carrier waiver in order to complete an application for further leave once back in the UK. In some cases, an applicant with leave, applying for further leave or ready to apply for settlement, may not have been able to travel back to the UK, but instead was able to access a VAC to apply for indefinite leave. Appendix FM would not ordinarily allow for a period of leave to enter or remain, followed by another period of leave to enter in order to be eligible to apply for settlement after five-years. However, where the application was made in order to maintain a continuous period of lawful residence, you may take that period of leave to enter into account.
You may disregard a period of leave outside the Immigration Rules granted by Border Force to allow an applicant to re-enter the UK following a period of being stranded overseas due to COVID-19 when their leave expired between 1 March 2020 and 31 May 2021.
>>> Chapter 08: appendix FM family members (immigration staff guidance): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chapter-8-appendix-fm-family-members?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=e21f303e-7ec6-4769-a852-7ee98636786f&utm_content=daily
"Instruction for handling cases which raise the impact of the 2020/21 COVID-19 pandemic as grounds for not meeting the minimum income requirement in an entry clearance, leave to remain or indefinite leave to remain applications under the family Immigration Rules.
This guidance sets out the approach you must take over defined periods, when deciding a case, to ensure applicants are not disadvantaged as a result of circumstances beyond their control because of COVID-19.
Income received via the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme or the Coronavirus Self-Employment Income Support Scheme can count as employment or self-employment income. Where there is evidence of a temporary loss of income due to COVID-19 during the period 1 March 2020 and 31 May 2021 you will apply the following concessions:
• a temporary loss of employment income between 1 March and 31 May 2021 due to COVID-19, will be disregarded provided the minimum income requirement was met for at least 6 months immediately prior to the date the income was lost - this is for a loss of employment income between 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2021 due to COVID-19 an applicant or sponsor furloughed under the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme will be deemed as earning 100% of their salary
• a temporary loss of annual income due to COVID-19 between 1 March 2020 and 31 May2021 will generally be disregarded for self-employment income, along with the impact on employment income from the same period for future applications.
• evidential flexibility may be applied where an applicant or sponsor experiences difficulty accessing specified evidence due to COVID-19 restrictions
>>> Family migration: adequate maintenance and accommodation: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/family-migration-adequate-maintenance-and-accommodation?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=3623efb7-ae97-4c3f-8e98-1c6770000988&utm_content=daily
Updated covid concessions.
>>> Returning residents: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/returning-residents?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=057535ea-72a5-4822-b24d-49f3f55dce32&utm_content=daily
Added amendments relating to COVID related absences (see p. 12).
>>> Criminal courts scrap rule requiring defendants to state their nationality pre-trial: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/40/contents/made
As of yesterday, the nationality requirement is no more. This is thanks to the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2021 (SI 2021 No. 40 (L. 1)), the relevant provisions of which came into force on 8 February 2021.
>>> Government unlawfully denied refugee status to Egyptian dissident on national security grounds: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/113.html
In the latest round of the legal saga involving Egyptian dissident Yasser Al-Siri, the Court of Appeal has ruled that the Home Office acted unlawfully in only granting him restricted leave to remain after an earlier First-tier Tribunal decision that he is a refugee. There was, the court found, no fresh evidence allowing the Home Office to get around the First-tier Tribunal’s decision (the Ladd v Marshall test). The case is Al-Siri v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 113.
>>> Get a faster decision on your visa or settlement application: https://www.gov.uk/faster-decision-visa-settlement/eligible-visas-when-applying-inside-the-uk
Eligible visas when applying from inside the UK
You can apply for a faster decision on certain visa applications or applications to settle in the UK.
The table lists the eligible visas and whether you can pay to get a decision:
- within 5 working days
- by the end of the next working day
>>> Home Office given 48 hours to release immigration detainee despite coronavirus: R (SH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 177 (Admin)
In an interim relief decision the High Court has ordered the release of an immigration detainee within 48 hours, indicating that judges will not allow the Home Office to use the pandemic as cover to justify long “grace period” delays in releasing detainees. As regular readers and practitioners know, those delays were common even before the pandemic.
>>> High Court judge threatens Priti Patel with contempt of court proceedings: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2021/240.html
A High Court judge has raised the prospect of contempt of court proceedings against the Home Secretary, Priti Patel, after her department breached a mandatory injunction. Mr Justice Chamberlain made the ominous comments in the case of Mohammad v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 240 (Admin).
>>> Reintroduction of some in-country priority visa services: https://www.gov.uk/faster-decision-visa-settlement/eligible-visas-when-applying-inside-the-uk
From 20 January we have reintroduced the next working day Super Priority (SPV) service and the 5 working day Priority (PV) to in-country work and student application routes.
All other in-country immigration application routes will continue to offer a standard service at this time. The service will be reintroduced to further in-country routes as and when those factors allow.
>>> Administrative fee for cancelling appointments
Sopra Steria have introduced a £10.00 admin free for cancelling appointments, even where it is cancelled more than 48 hours before the appointment. This is preventing applicants from being able to search for better appointment availability.
>>> 240 days to submit the biometrics
From the UK BA:
Completing the application and booking a UKVCAS appointment
Customers are reminded that once they have completed their application on Access UK and have been transferred to the UKVCAS website, that they have 240 days to submit their biometrics.
If customers do not complete their biometric enrolment within 240 days their application will be closed, and they will need to recommence their application process.
>>> Unusual costs decision against the Home Office: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/138.html
In R (Mozumder) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 138, the Court of Appeal has dealt with an unusual costs issue arising from the furore over alleged cheating in English language tests.
The issue was how costs should be apportioned from a judicial review which challenged removal on the ground that an out-of-country appeal was not an effective remedy where the individual had been accused of cheating on his English language test. After the judicial review, the appellant had subsequently made a separate appeal against removal on the basis of his human rights and the First-tier Tribunal found that he had not cheated. The Court of Appeal decided that it could take into account the later tribunal decision, even though it had not been available to the judge at first instance, and that therefore the appellant had been successful and was entitled to his costs:
"If Mr Mozumder had been found by the FTT judge to have cheated and thus had his appeal rejected I for my part would have been extremely reluctant to award him any costs at all. Since it has now been held by the appropriate tribunal that he had not cheated, I consider he should be treated as the winner in substance as well as on the procedural issue and should be awarded his costs of the judicial review which led to that result being achieved."
>>> Indefinite leave to remain can be revoked, but not cancelled: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2021/242.html
Briefly, the Home Office has no power to cancel indefinite leave to remain (ILR) under Article 13 of the Immigration (Leave to Enter & Remain) Order 2000.
The judgment brings into sharp focus how complex primary and secondary immigration legislation has become. The Law Commission has tried to simplify the Immigration Rules, but there is a case for attempting the same with the underlying legislation from which the Rules actually derive.
>>> Can an illiterate spouse join a British partner in the UK ?
The answer is probably, "No".
The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge brought against the introduction of pre-entry English language testing for spouses seeking to enter the UK as the family members of British citizens and those present and settled in the UK. The formal title of the case is R (on the applications of Ali and Bibi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 68 but is will be known generally as just Ali and Bibi: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2013-0270.html
>>> EU citizens with the EU pre-settled status can sponsor family members under Appendix FM
Since 31 December 2020, the list of people who can sponsor a family member under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules has included those who are “in the UK with limited leave under Appendix EU, in accordance with paragraph GEN 1.3(d)”.
As the name suggests, GEN 1.3(d) is found in the “General” section of Appendix FM. It says:
"References to a person being “in the UK with limited leave under Appendix EU” mean an EEA national in the UK who holds valid limited leave to enter or remain granted under paragraph EU3 of Appendix EU to these Rules on the basis of meeting condition 1 in paragraph EU14 of that Appendix."
Condition 1 of paragraph EU14 of Appendix EU is what people have to satisfy to be granted pre-settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme. The upshot is that people with pre-settled status can now use Appendix FM to sponsor family members. This applies to all family visa categories covered by Appendix FM, even “parent of a child” and adult dependent relatives applications, as pre-settled status is now a qualifying status for the child’s other parent where the child does not live with the applicant.
There are also sponsorship provisions for Turkish workers and businesspeople granted limited leave under Appendix ECAA Extension of Stay, but only for partner visas.
>>> Justice Secretary hails attack on migrants’ Article 3 and human trafficking rights: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9260365/Deportation-lawyers-taking-ride-Justice-Secretary-warns.html
The government wants to restrict the ability of migrants to resist removal from the UK by invoking their right not to suffer inhuman or degrading treatment, the Justice Secretary has said. In an interview with the Daily Mail, Robert Buckland “confirmed plans to restrict the use of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights” in immigration and asylum cases.
22 February 2021 – 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)
[B]>>> Continuous Residence Guidance[/B]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/continuous-residence
Immigration staff guidance on assessing and calculating the continuous residence requirements under Appendix Continuous Residence.
[B]>>> Visa decision waiting times: applications inside the UK[/B]: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/visa-decision-waiting-times-applications-inside-the-uk
[B]>>> Grace period for overstayers cannot be relied on twice[/B]: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/184.html
The grace period for overstayers in paragraph 39E of the Immigration Rules cannot be relied on twice. This, in short, is the conclusion of the Court of Appeal in Kalsi & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 184.
[B]>>> Upper Tribunal guidance on credible documentary evidence[/B]: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2021/33.html
The Upper Tribunal in QC (verification of documents; Mibanga duty) China [2021] UKUT 33 (IAC) has given useful guidance on how to approach documentary evidence submitted by asylum appellants.
The tribunal has also clarified the circumstances in which Home Office must make enquiries to verify an appellant’s documentary evidence before rejecting it as false (a ‘verification obligation’). In cases where the verification obligation arises, but the Home Office doesn’t do anything to verify the document’s authenticity, any complaints about whether the document is genuine will be ignored by the tribunal.
>>> Supreme Court to hear appeal on EU citizens’ access to benefits: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/1741.html
An update on the Fratila case, which in December 2020 saw the Court of Appeal hand down a very significant decision improving access to benefits such as Universal Credit for EU citizens with pre-settled status. A stay on that decision (i.e. it didn’t take legal effect) was in place until 26 February 2021 while the government considered an appeal. Permission for that appeal has now been granted by the Supreme Court and the stay extended until it is resolved.
The Court of Justice of the European Union is also due to consider the same legal point, after a case was referred to it on 30 December 2020 by a tribunal in Northern Ireland. That could complicate things: the Supreme Court may, for example, want to wait for that decision before handing down its own. On the other hand, the EU case could represent a second bite at the cherry should the Supreme Court side with the government: “the CJEU’s ruling on a reference made by a UK court or tribunal (just) before the end of transition, will be binding on all UK courts”.
>>> Lengthy absences from the UK can put EU settled status at risk
People with pre-settled status, in particular, need to be aware of the absence rules. If they have been outside the UK for more than six months in any 12-month period, they will now only be able to upgrade to settled status if they returned to the UK before 31 December 2020.
You have been warned.
>>> Immigration measures in the 2021 Budget: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/budget-2021-what-you-need-to-know
The UK Government intends to introduece new routes (aka HSMP/Tier 1 (General) and modify the existing route (Innovator, Global Talent etc)
Namely:
" 2.140 High-skilled migration – The government is modernising the immigration system to help the UK attract and retain the most highly skilled, globally mobile talent – particularly in academia, science, research and technology – from around the world. This will drive innovation, and support UK jobs and growth. To do this, the government will:
• introduce, by March 2022, an elite points-based visa. Within this visa there will be a ‘scaleup’ stream, enabling those with a job offer from a recognised UK scale-up to qualify for a fast-track visa
• reform the Global Talent visa, including to allow holders of international prizes and winners of scholarships and programmes for early promise to automatically qualify
• review the Innovator visa to make it easier for those with the skills and experience to found an innovative business to obtain a visa
• launch the new Global Business Mobility visa by spring 2022 for overseas businesses to establish a presence or transfer staff to the UK
• provide practical support to small firms that are using the visa system for the first time
• modernise the immigration sponsorship system to make it easier to use. The government will publish a delivery roadmap in the summer
• establish a global outreach strategy by expanding the Global Entrepreneur Programme, marketing the UK’s visa offering and explore building an overseas talent network"
Special treatment for fast-growing “scale-up” companies — the evolved form of a “start-up” — was trailed ahead of the Budget and seems to be aimed at financial technology companies specifically. The Kalifa Review of the UK’s offer to fintech firms, published last week and strongly endorsed by the Treasury, recommended:
"A ‘Fintech Scaleup Stream’ within the Global Talent (or proposed Unsponsored) route… Those with a job offer at the required skills level (RQF6) from a recognised UK fintech scaleup would automatically qualify for the Fintech ScaleUp Stream under either the Global Talent, or proposed Unsponsored Route, without the need for third party endorsement. This would be a world-leading offering and would position the UK as the top destination for the most globally talented in the sector."
It sounds as though the government has plumped for making the “scale-up stream” a subset of a new unsponsored route rather than Global Talent. The broader “elite points-based visa” that it would sit within sounds like a reference to the proposed revival of an unsponsored work route, similar to the old Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP), that was mooted but kicked into the long grass last year. Then again, the requirement for a job offer is an odd fit for an “unsponsored” route, so the one will have to see how this shakes out. Perhaps the one will end up with a halfway house, where the scale-up visa application will require proof of a job offer but the employer won’t need a full-on sponsor licence.
Reviewing the Innovator route is welcome as it has so far been a disaster. Sorting out a visa that overseas entrepreneurs don’t laugh at in disbelief is probably a necessary condition for successfully “marketing the UK’s visa offering” as mentioned in the final bullet point. Likewise, expanding eligibility for Global Talent is a positive step, although it’s only a year since the last “reform” of this route.
Finally, the “new Global Business Mobility visa” sounds like a rebrand of the Representative of an Overseas Business route.
None of this will happen today or tomorrow; the one can expect the changes to be implemented via statements of changes to the Immigration Rules in the usual way.
>>> Coronavirus (COVID-19): advice for UK visa applicants and temporary UK residents: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-advice-for-uk-visa-applicants-and-temporary-uk-residents?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=a2043c47-6739-42cf-b334-eabc025982b2&utm_content=daily
Amended ‘If you’re in the UK’ section, updating exceptional assurance visa or leave expiry dates to between 1 March 2021 and 31 March 2021.
Updated guidance in the ‘if you intend to stay in the UK’ section.
>>> General information – all British nationals: nationality policy guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/british-nationals-nationality-policy-guidance?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=011a491a-cfcb-42c0-a2c4-c6bf89d18324&utm_content=daily
Updated guidance
>>> Policy on fee waivers for entry clearance is unlawful, government concedes
In another blow for the Home Office on visa application fees, the department has been forced to concede that its policy on fee waivers for entry clearance applications is unlawful.
The policy is expected to be changed now.
The impending policy change offers a ray of hope. Many applicants have been struggling in a Catch-22 situation for years: unable to enter the UK because of not being able to pay the visa application fee, and unable to get a waiver for the application fee because of being outside the UK. For many people stuck in this situation, the change can’t come soon enough – especially after a year of coronavirus heartache and financial turmoil.
The Home Office hasn’t yet said when the new policy will be published – hopefully soon, given that it has conceded that the current policy (still up on the Home Office website) is unlawful. But it has said that in the meantime, urgent fee waiver applications will be reviewed. Anyone making an application at this stage should submit evidence that they cannot afford the application fee, and evidence that their case requires urgent consideration.
>>> Can an EEA frontier worker switch into a new immigration category in-country ?
The Home Office has confirmed that frontier workers can switch to other immigration categories in the UK (as long as they meet eligibility requirements of the category they wish to switch into).
The Home Office has also confirmed that if an EEA national holds frontier working status but wishes to travel to the UK for a purpose other than work (for example, a recreational visit) they will be admitted to the UK as a visitor under the Immigration Rules, and not as a frontier worker. It remains to be seen how this policy will be implemented in practice.
>>> Can an income from the child who has turned 18 be taken into account (UK Spouse visas) ?
Apparently, the answer is "yes":
Appendix FM-SE:
"1(b)
(ii) income from a dependent child who has turned 18, remains in the same UK household as the applicant and continues to be counted towards the financial requirement under Appendix FM;"
>>> New UK Visa fees: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visa-regulations-revised-table
>>> New Graduate route to open from 1 July 2021
The new Graduate route will open for applications on 1 July 2021. Eligible students holding a Tier 4 or Student visa valid on or after 1 July 2021 will have the opportunity apply to stay in the UK for 2 years (3 years for doctoral students) to work or seek employment.
The UK has also extended the coronavirus concessions for students who so far have been unable to travel to the UK. Students who started their studies in Autumn 2020 will now need to be in the UK by 21 June 2021 to be eligible to apply under the Graduate route. Students starting their studies in January/February 2021 required to be in the UK by 27 September 2021.
>>> IDV app continues to be offered to eligible in-country Students
Applicants applying in the UK under the student route, and whose biometrics have been recorded in a previous application, continue be assessed by UK Visas & Immigration (UKVI) for eligibility to use the IDV app. The IDV app is free and enables applicants to submit application information to UKVI without having to book or attend an appointment with UK Visa & Citizenship Applications Services (UKVCAS). Once UKVI have undertaken this eligibility assessment, UKVCAS will contact applicants to inform them either use the IDV app or to book an appointment at a UKVCAS Service Point.
The IDV app is currently only being used for eligible Tier 4 applicants in the UK. The IDV app cannot be used for other routes, including all applications for replacement biometric residence cards.
>>> Government plans to reduce the use of judicial review in immigration cases: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/13/exclusive-ban-lawyers-needlessly-delaying-deportation-flights/
The report of the Independent Review of Administrative Law will be published this week and the Justice Secretary will on Thursday set out plans for reducing the use of judicial review in immigration cases, the Telegraph reports.
The paper says that those plans include an end to Cart/Eba judicial reviews of the Upper Tribunal’s refusal to grant permission for an appeal to itself:
"One plan would see lawyers prevented from launching judicial reviews of Upper Tribunal immigration decisions, bringing the system back in line with previous years.
A new law will be passed to overturn a 2012 Supreme Court ruling which allowed these cases to be subject to judicial review."
This would be only “the first salvo from the Government in a major crackdown on so-called ‘meritless’ immigration and asylum claims expected in coming weeks”. Previous reports have suggested that the government also wants to restrict migrants’ rights under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Judicial review applications to the UTIAC have fallen every year since 2015/16, from 15,800 then to 5,700 last year.
>>> Covid-19 advice for UK visa applicants and temporary UK residents: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-advice-for-uk-visa-applicants-and-temporary-uk-residents
This was updated on 19 March 2021 to change the exceptional assurance expiry date to 30 April 2021.
>>> Covid-19: jobs that qualify for travel exemptions: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-travellers-exempt-from-uk-border-rules
This was updated on 22 March 2021 with further details about exemptions for essential and emergency work and is on GOV.UK here. This page was also updated on 19 March to exempt aviation and maritime crew from red list country quarantine measures and remove Portugal (including Madeira and the Azores) from the red list.
>>> Entry clearance fees:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/entry-clearance-fees-ecb06
Information and guidance on handling visa applications made outside the UK published on GOV.UK and archived here. This was updated on 15 March 2021 to add a call out box to explain that the current guidance for the discretion to waive a fee in other cases is being revised and not currently operational, but can still apply.
>>> Public Funds: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-funds
Version 17 of this guidance has been published on GOV.UK. The guidance has been updated to reflect changes arising at the end of the transition period after the UK’s exit from the EU.
>>> Re-entry bans: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/offender-management
A new version of the guidance 'Re-entry bans' as been published on GOV.UK.
>>> Three persons win appeals against losing British citizenship
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) has allowed the appeals of three people who were deprived of their British citizenship following allegations that they had travelled to Syria and posed a threat to national security.
Those interested in the details can search for "C3, C4 & C7 v Secretary of State for the Home Department (SC/167/2020, SC/168/2020 and SC/171/2020)".