05 June 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> What if applicant is not intending to travel straight away to the UK ?
The ECO should check the applicant’s visa application form (VAF) for the proposed date of travel in order to prevent unnecessary applications for an extension of stay, and possible claims for a refund of the extension fee.
Where an applicant may not intend or be able to travel to the UK immediately following their application they can apply for a visa at any time before the date of travel to the UK, however, we can only defer the start date of the visa up to a maximum 3 months from the date of application. You may need to ensure that applicants applying under the various employment categories or as students would be acceptable to their UK sponsor, should entry be deferred by 3 months.
06 June 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Home Office breaches Withdrawal Agreement: delayed Certificate of Applications in EU Settlement Scheme
The Independent Monitoring Authority has released a report following an inquiry into the delays in issuing Certificates of Applications to EU Settlement Scheme applicants. The report confirms the government’s obligations under the Withdrawal Agreement and evidences where and why delays are occurring.
Those who applied to the EU Settlement Scheme should receive a Certificate of Application immediately, whilst they are awaiting a decision on their application. This enables them to evidence their right to work, rent, and access benefits in the interim period. The inquiry was launched to establish whether the Home Office had fulfilled its obligations to issue a Certificate of Application immediately, following a number of complaints of people experiencing delays. Not issuing a Certificate of Application immediately may put the government in breach of its obligations under Articles 17(1) and 18(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement.
The report found that in June 2022 the Home Office still did not have enough caseworkers to assist in cases where digital applications required manual intervention to display a certificate immediately. The report also confirms that many caseworkers that are available do not have sufficient training, which contributed to delays. Delays were also evident in paper applications as these require more involvement from a caseworker.
In June 2021, 20 digital applications were made in relation to children. 11 of these “dropped out” of the automated system and required a caseworker to review them. For these 11, there was a delay of between 46 and 107 days before a casework review took place and a certificate was issued. Had the process remained digital and automatic, the certificate would have been issued on the same day that the application was submitted.
The Home Office does not routinely collate or publish statistics in relation to certificates. Without this data it is difficult to see how the Home Office can accurately assess to what extent it is issuing certificates immediately, and therefore to what extent it is fulfilling its obligation under the Withdrawal Agreement. It also means the Home Office cannot make informed decisions on resourcing and deployment in order to remedy any issues.
Smooth and swift processing of applications is important. Delaying issuing a Certificate of Application in particular puts an individual at risk of because they will not be able to authoritatively prove they have a pending application and are entitled to protection, benefits and rights in the UK.
14 June 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
More than a quarter of people crossing the Channel in small boats came from Albania in 2022, although the numbers have since then declined massively. Until recently, around half of asylum claims from Albanian nationals were initially accepted. However, a report by the House of Commons Home Affairs committee concludes that Albania is generally a safe country but with problems for certain groups, including women and victims of trafficking. Interesting, the report goes on to suggest increasing the number of work visas granted to Albanians:
"Only 325 work visas were granted to Albanian nationals in the first nine months of 2022, with evidence submitted to the inquiry arguing that a perceived difficulty in obtaining work in the UK through legal means could be driving people towards clandestine migration routes. The Committee finds that more should be done to promote the availability of visas that would fill worker shortages in the UK economy and enable some transfer of wealth back to Albania. This would include short-term or seasonal work in sectors such as construction or agriculture.”
Albania is currently on the list of safe countries to which asylum seekers can be removed with no assessment of their asylum claim under the Illegal Migration Bill.
15 June 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Ukrainian Extension Scheme (UES) UPDATE
Subject to the Parliamentary process, the Immigration Rules are expected to change in July 2023 to extend the eligibility for the Ukraine Extension Scheme to include those who were granted permission after 16 May and by 16 November 2023, with all applications to be made before 16 May 2024.
If you were granted permission after 16 May 2023, you will be able to apply to the Ukraine Extension Scheme once the new rules are in force in August. You should wait until more information is available then to submit your application.
>>> Gulf and Jordanian visitors to pay £10 for an Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA)
28 June 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Court of Appeal finds Rwanda plan unlawful as Rwanda is not a safe third country
The Court of Appeal has found, by a majority, that the Rwanda plan is unlawful as Rwanda is not a sufficiently safe country. In short, the Rwandan authorities are not yet reliably able to sort genuine from non-genuine refugees, and therefore there is too great a risk that genuine refugees will be returned to their home countries where they might face persecution. Afghans and Syrians, for example, currently have a 100% rejection rate in Rwanda.
04 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> The 180-day absence rule doesn’t apply to people with a spouse or partner visa
Many UK immigration categories impose a requirement that the visa holder must not be outside the UK for more than 180 days in any 12-month period — that is, if the person wants to apply for indefinite leave to remain.
The good news is that this rule doesn’t apply to spouse and partner visa holders under the Appendix FM
Is there an absences limit for spouses?
In short, no. Within the Immigration Rules for spouses and partners — found in the notorious Appendix FM — you won’t find a rule that says a person holding a spouse or partner visa should not be absent from the UK for a certain number of days.
But this doesn’t mean that those using this route can get a visa, rarely set foot in the UK but expect to be able to settle here.
The Supreme Court has held that there was no legal obligation to consider the equality impact of excluding Palestinians from the UK’s resettlement scheme for refugees from Syria. The design of the scheme was therefore lawful. The case is R (on the application of Marouf) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 23.
Briefly, the UK’s resettlement scheme relied on one United Nations agency, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), to select refugees for resettlement. This had the effect of excluding from the scheme the many Palestinian refugees living in Syria. This is because UNHCR is excluded from responsibility for Palestinians because they are the responsibility of a different United Nations agency, United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).
07 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
The British Nationality (Regularisation of Past Practice) Act 2023 came into force on 29 June 2023. It inserts a new section 50B into the British Nationality Act 1981. Section 50B definitively and retrospectively confirms the British nationality status of all children born in the UK between 1 January 1983 and 1 October 2000 to an EU citizen parent who was exercising free movement in the UK at the time of their child’s birth.
This new legislation is good. It commits a long-standing Home Office policy to the statute book, and resolves a discrepancy between law and policy which was thrown into sharp focus on 20 January 2023 in R (on the application of Roehrig) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 31 (Admin). Our detailed write-up of Roehrig is worth reading to better understand why this has become an issue now, over two decades after the period in question.
The Home Office factsheet accompanying the new legislation doesn’t want us to get too excited:
"this change does not create ‘new’ British citizens. This is about protecting the citizenship of individuals we had long considered British already under established Home Office policy."
The High Court decision in Roehrig could have had disastrous implications. Thankfully, the Home Office legislated swiftly to ensure that was not the case.
The Home Secretary was entitled to refuse entry clearance to an Afghan interpreter accused of releasing sensitive information and threatening to kill coalition forces. That was the conclusion of the High Court in FMA and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1579 (Admin), the latest judicial review concerning the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (‘ARAP’).
12 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
Immigration detainees don’t have a right to face-to-face legal advice, the Court of Appeal has held in R (on the application of SPM) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 764.
SPM was held at Derwentside Immigration Removal Centre in early 2022. At the time, there were no nearby firms contracted to provide initial legally aided advice there under the Detention Duty Advice Scheme. SPM could only receive such advice by telephone or videoconferencing. She argued that her detention was unlawful because of a real risk that her common law right of access to justice would be breached if she couldn’t have an in-person legal visit.
SPM lost her case. Her fundamental problem was section 27 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This says that legal aid services can be provided ‘by telephone or other electronic means’, and there’s no duty to make an individual’s chosen method available. Even without that, the Court said, access to justice didn’t require face-to-face legal advice, particularly where it was initially limited to a 30-minute triage:
"I am not persuaded that the lack of an option, in practice, for face-to-face meetings as part of DDAS constituted an impediment to justice or created a real risk of such an impediment. At the most, it was a less than ideal way of carrying out initial legal visits for some of the women at Derwentside for some of the time".
Arrangements have changed at Derwentside; initial advice is now available face-to-face there. If and when the Illegal Migration Bill passes, however it will require a significant increase in detention capacity and, as a result, in legal visits. It remains to be seen whether the Home Office relies on SPM to justify remote-only advice on a much bigger scale.
14 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> No more free appointments on Saturday, Sopra Steria says
From the Sopra Steria:
"There will be changes to the distribution of free UKVCAS appointments in about 4 weeks’ time so that there will no longer be free appointments available on a Saturday, and all free appointments will instead be on Monday to Friday. The justification provided for this change was that it would introduce equity across regions because not every UKVCAS site currently operates on a Saturday, as well as consistency with UKVI’s overseas network."
>>> Asylum decisions will be served by Email
From the Home Office:
"Regulation 7(1)(d) of the Immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003 (as amended by the Immigration (Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2008) confirms that immigration decisions can be served electronically. As such, our default position is to serve asylum decisions via email wherever possible."
17 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
A ‘dependent parent’ already admitted under the EU Settlement Scheme can get leave to remain without having to show dependency, the Upper Tribunal has held in Rexhaj (extended family members: assumed dependency) [2023] UKUT 00161 (IAC).
If applying before 30 June 2021, the parent of an EU national or of their spouse could obtain entry clearance as a ‘dependent parent’ without actually needing to prove they were dependent. Appendix EU (Family Permit) to the Immigration Rules said dependency would just be assumed. A parent who wants to stay longer than six months then needs to apply for leave to remain under Appendix EU. That Appendix does require dependency to be proven, unless the person has previously been ‘granted limited leave to enter or remain under this Appendix as a dependent parent’.
Ms Rexhaj was in this situation. The Home Office and First-tier Tribunal told her she needed to show dependency, because her leave to enter had been granted under Appendix EU (Family Permit), not under Appendix EU.
She appealed, and the Upper Tribunal concluded this was wrong. Its reasoning turned on the legal distinction between entry clearance (a visa granted before travel) and leave to enter (permission to enter the UK granted by an immigration officer on arrival). On a proper reading, Appendix EU (Family Permit) only governs entry clearance. Leave to enter is granted at the border under Appendix EU. Someone like Ms Rexhaj, therefore, has leave ‘under this Appendix’ and qualifies for an extension without needing to show dependency.
As the UT commented, the post-Brexit rules ‘do not appear to have been drafted with future (or even present) clarity in mind’. Ms Rexhaj won’t be the only person wrongly told to prove dependency after not having to do so in her first application. This decision provides welcome clarification.
19 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
Transition Period for visitors with pre-booked travel to the UK
As for the general transition period, the Statement of Changes states:
"In relation to those changes, if an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or leave to remain, has been made before 19 July 2023, such applications will be decided in accordance with the Immigration Rules in force on 18 July 2023."
However, there is a provision which will allow nationals of the affected countries who have booked travel to the UK prior to the rules coming into effect to enter as a visitor without a visa for a period of 4 weeks from today.
After VN 2.2(n) of Appendix Visitor: Visa national list, the following paragraph will be inserted:
“(o) nationals or citizens of Dominica, Honduras, Namibia, TimorLeste, and Vanuatu, who hold confirmed bookings to the UK made on or before 15:00 BST 19 July 2023 where arrival in the UK is no later than 16 August 2023.”.
This exception does not apply where the person is: (a) visiting the UK to marry or to form a civil partnership, or to give notice of marriage or civil partnership, unless they are a “relevant national” as defined in section 62 of the Immigration Act 2014; or (b) seeking to visit the UK for more than 6 months.
This transition period is explained in the Explanatory Memorandum as follows:
“7.2 The imposition of these visa regimes will include a transition period for any nationals of these countries who are travelling to the UK without a visa. This period will commence at the same time as the visa regime is imposed and run until four weeks after the imposition date. During this period, those nationals who hold a confirmed booking to the UK made before the exact time of the imposition, and where arrival in the UK is no later than four weeks after the imposition, will be exempt from the visa requirement. Those booking on or after the imposition, or due to arrive in the UK four weeks after the imposition, will require a visa.
7.3 This transition period will prevent operational difficulties, general unfairness, and ensure that people who arranged travel before this announcement do not lose money. The length of the period (four weeks) has been chosen to give the nationals of these countries enough time to book and receive a visa. The current service-level agreement for processing times for visit visas is approximately 15 working days. ”.
Airside transit
In relation to airside transit passengers, who “do not need to change airports or pass through the UK border”, the Explanatory Memorandum sets out that:
“7.4 The visa impositions will also be accompanied by amendments to the Immigration (Passenger Transit Visa) Order 2014, to ensure that nationals from these countries will also require a visa when conducting airside transit travel.”
20 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
26 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
In a highly technical decision, Osunneye (Zambrano, transitional appeal rights) Nigeria [2023] UKUT 162 (IAC), the Upper Tribunal has concluded that Zambrano appeals may proceed notwithstanding the various Brexit regulations. The official headnote:
"1. Following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 are continued for transitional purposes by statutory instruments including the Immigration and Social Security Coordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 (Consequential, Saving, Transitional and Transitory Provisions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (SI 1309/2020).
2. Paragraph 5 of Schedule 3 to the 2020 Regulations deals with “Existing appeal rights and appeals”. Paragraph 6 of Schedule 3 then sets out the specified provisions of the EEA Regulations 2016. Neither regulation 16 nor 20 of the EEA Regulations are included in that schedule. Regulation 36 relating to appeal rights is. Schedule 2 to the EEA Regulations is also amongst the provisions continued as modified. At paragraph 6(cc), the modifications to that schedule are set out.
3. Those provisions draw a distinction between appeals which arise before or are against decisions taken before 31 December 2020 (paragraphs 5(1)(a) to (c)) and those against decisions taken after 31 December 2020 (paragraph 5(1)(d)).
4. Contrary to the unreported decision in Secretary of State for the Home Department v Oluwayemisi Janet James (UI-2021-000631; EA/05622/2020), the right of appeal against a decision made prior to 31 December 2020 therefore continues in force until finally determined (see in that regard paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 3 to the 2020 Regulations).
5. Part Four of the Withdrawal Agreement is concerned with transitional provisions which apply during the transition or implementation period between the date of the Withdrawal Agreement and 31 December 2020.
6. Part Four of the Withdrawal Agreement applies “Union law” during the transition period. The Zambrano right is a derivative one which depends on Article 20 Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The TFEU is part of “the EU Treaties”. It is continued in force during the transition period.
A decision to the contrary would have come as something of a surprise as it was surely not intended by the Home Office. Notwithstanding the surprising submissions made by a Home Office Presenting Officer and the outcome of a different, unreported appeal."
31 July 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> The Illegal Migration Act 2023: Key points
The commencement provisions are set out at section 68, and it is important to bear in mind that much of the Act is not yet in force. If and when further provisions are brought into force, this will be done via regulations at a later date. The main provisions that came into force with Royal Assent are:
- Sections 30 to 37: Entry, settlement and citizenship
- Section 52: Judges of the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal
Section 30 prohibits a grant of entry clearance, an Electronic Travel Authority or leave to enter or remain to anyone who has arrived in the UK on or after 7 March 2023, and who meets the other three conditions set out in section 2. This is subject to certain exceptions, including for certain unaccompanied children and survivors of trafficking and where there would otherwise be a breach of human rights.
Section 31 defines an “ineligible person” as someone who has arrived since 7 March 2023 and has previously met the Section 2 conditions. This person is prohibited from registering or naturalising as a British Citizen under sections 32 to 37.
An important change since the Bill was published is that all of these provisions are no longer extended to the family members of the affected people.
01 August 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
If you married an EU national in the UK after 31 December 2020, you can’t get leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme unless you previously had or applied for an EEA residence card or family permit as their durable partner. That remains the case even if you would have got married sooner but for the impact of Covid-19. So held the Court of Appeal in Celik v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 921, agreeing with the Upper Tribunal’s decision last year.
11 August 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Reminder on the Home Office and NHS Surcarge Fees increase
From the Home Office
Visa Fees
We are increasing fees across a range of immigration and nationality routes, including for people coming here to live, work and study, at a time of record high migration numbers.
Specifically, this means increasing the cost of most work and visit visas by 15% and increasing the cost of study visas, certificates of sponsorship, settlement, citizenship, wider entry clearance and leave to remain visas, and priority visas by at least 20%. We are also equalising costs for students and for those using a priority service so people pay the same whether they apply from within the UK or from outside the UK.
It is the government’s policy that those who use and benefit most from the immigration system should contribute towards the cost of operating the system, reducing the burden on the UK taxpayer.
We will lay Regulations in the Autumn when Parliament returns that will amend the fee levels.
....
Immigration Health Surcharge Uplift
We are increasing the rates of the Immigration Health Surcharge, which have remained unchanged for the last three years despite high inflation and wider pressures facing the system.
It is right that people coming to the UK for more than six months, pay their fair share towards the NHS.
Subject to final confirmation and the passage of the necessary legislation, the main rate will increase to £1,035, and the discounted rate for students, their dependents, those on Youth Mobility Schemes and under-18s will increase to £776.
The civil penalty for employers, which was last increased in 2014, will be raised to up to £45,000 per illegal worker for a first breach from £15,000, and up to £60,000 for repeat breaches from £20,000.
For landlords the fines will increase from £80 per lodger and £1,000 per occupier for a first breach to up to £5,000 per lodger and £10,000 per occupier. Repeat breaches will be up to £10,000 per lodger and £20,000 per occupier, up from £500 and £3,000 respectively. The higher penalties will come in at the start of 2024.
>>> Graduate Route vs Marking Boycott - the Home Office's announcement
From the Home Office:
1. UKVI will consider exercising discretion and will hold Graduate route applications made before the applicant’s results have been received, provided that the results are received within 8 weeks of the application being made.
2.Students who do not know when they will receive their results due to the boycott will be able to apply to extend their permission whilst they wait for their results. They will be exceptionally exempt from meeting the academic progression requirements. Sponsors should include a note on the Conformation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS)that the extension is due to the marking boycott.
This a discretionary arrangement, and not a concessionary policy, and is being communicated in a way that is proportionate to the nature and type of the issue covered. We encourage the sector, including sponsors, to drive the dissemination of this flexibility, as the circumstances are the result of a dispute between institutions and their employees.
18 August 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
30 August 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Adult Dependent Relatives (ADR) Visas have the highest refusal rate ?
Between 2017 and 2020, 96% of applications were refused.
08 September 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
15 September 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> BRP Delivery - New Service Provider, Royal Mail (15 September 2023)
From the Home Office:
"From Monday 18th September 2023 we will moving from FedEx/TNT to Royal Mail Group for the delivery of biometric residence permits (BRP’s). The service will continue in a similar way to the previous provider, however the key differences are as follows:
A SIGNATURE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED to receive your BRP, this will be posted through the letterbox or mailbox. In the event that delivery of the BRP is not possible redelivery will need to be arranged or the BRP can be collected from Royal Mail’s local delivery office, details of which will be provided on the ‘Something for you’ card.
Once the BRP has been produced and collected by Royal Mail for delivery YOU WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO CHANGE YOUR DELIVERY ADDRESS, please can you ensure that your address details are kept up-to-date with UKVI"
28 September 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Home Office Update on Availability of Super Priority Service for Family & Human Rights Applicants without visas
From the Home Office:
"The Super Priority Service (24-hour same day service) would no longer be available for applicants without valid leave to enter or remain in the UK who are applying for leave on the basis of family or private life on form FLR(FP), or on the basis of human rights or outside the rules on form FLR(HRO).
>>> Expect (long) delays in some types of the UK Visas and Immigration applications
During the ILPA conference this week it was mentioned that the Home Office is struggling to recruit new caseworkers, that they moved the existing caseworkers to their Asylum Unit and that the caseworkers are leaving the Home Office jobs. That is resulting in some applications, such as FLR(FP)/Human Rights/Private Life etc to now have 12+ months consideration time.
29 September 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
06 October 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
The Migration Advisory Committee has recommended that the shortage occupation list is abolished and that people in the asylum system with permission to work are allowed to work in any role. These are some of the recommendations in the full review of the shortage occupation list, published yesterday.
The future of the shortage occupation list
At the outset of the report, the committee stated that they have carried out the review on the basis that employers should not be able to pay salaries lower than the “going rate”, regardless of whether there is a shortage. The current situation is that where a job is on the shortage occupation list, an employer can pay a migrant 80% of the going rate or of the minimum salary threshold of £26,200 for a skilled worker (i.e, £20,960), whichever is higher.
The committee made the point that there is no good reason why a discounted salary should be paid where an occupation is experiencing shortages. Without that discount, the benefits to being on the shortage occupation list are significantly diminished. The committee considered that the skilled worker route provides an adequate response to the needs of employers without the need for the list.
They pointed out that many employers now have unlimited access to overseas labour as long as the minimum salary of £26,200 for the skilled worker route is met. The committee commented that many employers seemed unaware of this.
The committee had discouraged stakeholders from submitting evidence in relation to higher paid roles, on the basis that inclusion on the shortage occupation list would not help them to use the immigration system more effectively. However submissions were still made, predominantly from government departments, arguing that the visa fee reduction that is available for roles on the shortage occupation list was a more than “negligible benefit”.
'If a claimant (or immigration advisor) needs their asylum claim considered for prioritisation they must contact the asylum decision-making team by email. When contacting the Home Office, they must explain the reason they want to have their claim prioritised and supply relevant evidence. This evidence must be supplied within 10 working days of submitting a request. If evidence is not supplied within this timeframe (without good reason) the request must be declined.'
Changes to clarify biometric requirements for the scheme.
Added definition of a legal guardian and application process for accompanied and unaccompanied children under 18.
Added instructions for decision makers handling cases from applicants who have a temporary legal guardian appointed in Poland.
Added instructions for decision makers handling duplicate cases.
Changes to the layout of the guidance for ease of reference, ensuring parity between schemes, updating as required.
Changes to add instructions on checking all systems for group applications to ensure consistency in handling.
18 October 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Is there a cap on the time a student may study in the UK ?
19 October 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
The Court of Appeal in R v Ginar [2023] EWCA Crim 1121 has given guidance on the appropriate criminal sentences for those convicted for the offence of arriving (or attempting to arrive) in the UK without entry clearance, contrary to section 24(D1) of the Immigration Act 1971. The offence was introduced by the government in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 with the explicit intention of targeting small boats crossing the Channel.
The court said that the custody threshold will ‘generally be crossed’ for people arriving in the UK by small boats, placing migrants and refugees at risk of prison sentences for making the dangerous journey across the Channel. The court has confirmed that the starting sentence for the offence should be 12 months’ imprisonment.
19 October 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
TLScontact in unsuccessful challenge to new Home Office contract.
It appears that one may start seeing changes in overseas visa processing centres soon, after TLScontact was unsuccessful in an attempt to stop the Home Office from entering into a new contract with VFS Global. The case is Teleperformance Contact Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 2481 (TCC). These proceedings are taking place in the Technology and Construction Court, part of the Business and Property Court of the High Court of Justice.
Background
TLScontact and VFS Global are both companies which manage the administrative side of visa applications for the UK and other countries, taking biometrics (photos and fingerprints) and helping with document checking and uploads as well as providing premium services for faster decisions on some applications.
On 12 July 2023 TLScontact’s parent company Teleperformance Contact Limited lodged a claim challenging the Home Secretary’s decision to award the visa processing contracts for Africa and the Middle East, the Americas, Canada, Australasia and Europe, China and Taiwan to VFS Global’s parent company, VF Worldwide Holding Limited. TLScontact was awarded the contract for services in the UK.
The effect of TLScontact lodging that claim was that the Home Secretary was prevented from entering into the contract with VFS Global under regulation 95(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. That prohibition can be lifted by interim court order. The Home Office applied for such an order and that was the issue to be decided at this hearing.
The hearing and decision
Evidence given on behalf of TLScontact was that the loss of this contract would result in closure of at least 64 of their centres, a 71% reduction in TLScontact revenue, over 750 redundancies and loss of reputation.
The court took issue with some of the evidence provided on behalf of TLScontact, pointing out that no losses could arise from the failure to award them the contract for China and Taiwan as they had no presence in those areas. The evidence also failed to mention the recent awarding to TLScontact of a contract by the Australian government to provide services in Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa, a contract they were taking over from VFS Global. TLScontact accepted that this meant they would maintain business at 10 of the locations.
The court also agreed with VFS Global that winning and losing contracts and opening and closing visa application centres is a route part of business in visa outsourcing, particularly between TLScontact and VFS Global, as the two largest operators.
The Home Office raised concerns that a further delay to their ability to enter into the new contract with VFS Global would result in, or create a very significant risk of a gap in services. TLScontact said that they would agree terms to extend the existing contracts with the Home Office. The court did not accept that this provided enough certainty as the extension would still need to be negotiated.
The court said that another relevant factor was that the new contracts will “include enhanced physical and digital security measures to standards higher than presently required; improved technology, modernisation of delivery of the services improvement to customer experience, and to contract management procedures”. Delays to these improvements would be detrimental to the wider public.
Applying the test from American Cyanamid v Ethicon [1975] AC 396, the court concluded that damages would be an adequate remedy for any loss experienced by TLScontact should it succeed in the substantive claim. It was held that the balance of convenience lay in lifting the stay and allowing the Home Office and VFS Global with the contract.
Conclusion
If the matter now proceeds to a full hearing, the court has indicated that this could take place in February or March 2024. It certainly seems from this decision that TLScontact may run into some evidential issues regarding their losses. Aside from the outcome of this case, hopefully one will see some significant improvements, as referenced above by the court, once the new contracts with VFS Global are underway.
31 October 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT)
Updated detail in the English language test providers in the UK and outside the UK
Briefly, for visa or citizenship applications, you may need to prove your knowledge of English by passing a secure English language test (SELT).
If you are in the UK
You can only take a SELT with one of the following providers:
- IELTS SELT Consortium
- LanguageCert
- Pearson
- Trinity College London
If you are outside of the UK
You can only take a SELT with one of the following providers:
- IELTS SELT Consortium
- LanguageCert
- Pearson
- PSI Services (UK) Ltd – Skills for English (UKVI)
02 November 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> How is the Home Office prioritising asylum claims?
First, there is no fixed timeframe for an asylum claim to be decided. Getting updates from the Home Office on progress, challenging delay and asking for expedition can often be a fruitless exercise.
The guidance identifies two main groups. The first group comprises people who claimed asylum before certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 were brought into force on 28 June 2022, these are referred to as ‘legacy’ cases. The PM’s commitment to clear the backlog applies only to ‘legacy’ cases.
Who does the guidance apply to?
The process set out in this guidance is separate to the questionnaire being used in the ‘streamlined asylum process’. The guidance also does not apply to asylum claims made by Albanian nationals, as those are being dealt with by a dedicated decision making unit.
The guidance identifies two main groups. The first group comprises people who claimed asylum before certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 were brought into force on 28 June 2022, these are referred to as ‘legacy’ cases. The PM’s commitment to clear the backlog applies only to ‘legacy’ cases.
The second group of cases is those made after that date, referred to as ‘flow’ cases. The newer ‘flow’ claims will not be prioritised until 2024, save in the exceptional circumstances identified below.
Children’s asylum claims should continue to be prioritised and there are two decision making units dedicated to these cases. The guidance recognises that the Home Office must carry out its functions in a way that is compatible with Section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009.
How will cases be decided?
Cases meeting the legacy criteria will be separated into groups using factors including nationality, volume of claims, grant rate, compliance rate and receipt of asylum support.
For some of these groups, a bespoke questionnaire will be issued ahead of an asylum interview. The form can be completed digitally via an online Home Office form or returned via post/email. Repeated failure to return a questionnaire risks a claim being treated as withdrawn. In the first instance this will apply to Iranian and Iraqi claims by adults as this group has the highest number of outstanding claims within the legacy backlog.
Other applicants will be invited to interview unless a decision can be made on the information already available. When a case is suitable this would be a good opportunity to ask for a decision to be made on the papers alone where there is detailed evidence to support the claim and/or where there has already been lengthy delay.
Exceptional case prioritisation
The guidance acknowledges that there are exceptional circumstances outside of the above programmes which will require prioritisation. The guidance provides a non-exhaustive list of cases that can be prioritised:
- cases involving the Hague Convention
- extradition cases
- cases involving deportation of foreign national offenders
- complex or severe physical or mental health cases
- cases of severe vulnerability – examples include but are not limited to severe safeguarding concerns such as where there has been suicidal ideation or torture and this is evidenced by relevant medical evidence, for example a medico-legal report
Requests should be in writing and sent to the main asylum casework team. Evidence must be submitted within ten working days of making the request.
Helpfully, the guidance states that expedition requests must be considered, so anyone seeking prioritisation should push for a written response. In some cases, it might be helpful to request review by a senior caseworker. Any response from the Home Office should include an indicative time frame for a decision.
Additionally, updates can be requested where six months has passed and the Home Office should respond with a time frame for decision making, as required under paragraph 333A of the immigration rules. The Home Office is however not obliged to comply with the given time frame.
Tips for expediting an asylum claim
Anyone seeking expedition should:
- ensure that the Home Office has their up to date contact details. This should mean that any communication regarding prioritisation is received and avoids the risk of their claim being treated as withdrawn;
- take this opportunity to request a decision on the papers alone where there is detailed evidence such as a medico-legal report;
- take this opportunity to request updates and seek timeframes for decision making.
It is also worth being aware of when the Home Office will consider that there is a barrier to progression of a case. This includes where they are waiting for evidence that will be important to the decision (including medico-legal reports), where there is a pending prosecution, or where there is a “change in country situation requiring an update in country information note leading to a pause in deciding cases from a particular nationality”.
Secondary asylum casework
Interestingly, the guidance also has a section called ‘secondary asylum casework’. This includes cases that have been reinstated after being withdrawn, that were considered under pre-28 June 2022 inadmissibility processes and subsequently admitted to the asylum system, and where a case has been remitted to the decision maker at the review stage of an appeal. These cases will be considered in chronological order unless they meet the above criteria for exceptional case prioritisation.
Where cases have been considered for inadmissibility since 28 June 2022 and then admitted into the asylum system they will be considered in the legacy or flow groups according to the date of application and any other relevant prioritisation criteria set out in the guidance.
03 November 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
07 November 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
07 November 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT) - Updated list
Комментарии
>>> What if applicant is not intending to travel straight away to the UK ?
From the UK BA: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/entry-clearance-vignettes-ecb09/ecb09-entry-clearance-vignettes-types-safeguarding-and-validity#ecb95-what-if-applicant-is-not-intending-to-travel-straight-away-to-the-uk
The ECO should check the applicant’s visa application form (VAF) for the proposed date of travel in order to prevent unnecessary applications for an extension of stay, and possible claims for a refund of the extension fee.
Where an applicant may not intend or be able to travel to the UK immediately following their application they can apply for a visa at any time before the date of travel to the UK, however, we can only defer the start date of the visa up to a maximum 3 months from the date of application. You may need to ensure that applicants applying under the various employment categories or as students would be acceptable to their UK sponsor, should entry be deferred by 3 months.
>>> Home Office breaches Withdrawal Agreement: delayed Certificate of Applications in EU Settlement Scheme
The Independent Monitoring Authority has released a report following an inquiry into the delays in issuing Certificates of Applications to EU Settlement Scheme applicants. The report confirms the government’s obligations under the Withdrawal Agreement and evidences where and why delays are occurring.
Those who applied to the EU Settlement Scheme should receive a Certificate of Application immediately, whilst they are awaiting a decision on their application. This enables them to evidence their right to work, rent, and access benefits in the interim period. The inquiry was launched to establish whether the Home Office had fulfilled its obligations to issue a Certificate of Application immediately, following a number of complaints of people experiencing delays. Not issuing a Certificate of Application immediately may put the government in breach of its obligations under Articles 17(1) and 18(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement.
The report found that in June 2022 the Home Office still did not have enough caseworkers to assist in cases where digital applications required manual intervention to display a certificate immediately. The report also confirms that many caseworkers that are available do not have sufficient training, which contributed to delays. Delays were also evident in paper applications as these require more involvement from a caseworker.
In June 2021, 20 digital applications were made in relation to children. 11 of these “dropped out” of the automated system and required a caseworker to review them. For these 11, there was a delay of between 46 and 107 days before a casework review took place and a certificate was issued. Had the process remained digital and automatic, the certificate would have been issued on the same day that the application was submitted.
The Home Office does not routinely collate or publish statistics in relation to certificates. Without this data it is difficult to see how the Home Office can accurately assess to what extent it is issuing certificates immediately, and therefore to what extent it is fulfilling its obligation under the Withdrawal Agreement. It also means the Home Office cannot make informed decisions on resourcing and deployment in order to remedy any issues.
Smooth and swift processing of applications is important. Delaying issuing a Certificate of Application in particular puts an individual at risk of because they will not be able to authoritatively prove they have a pending application and are entitled to protection, benefits and rights in the UK.
>>> Home Affairs Committee finds Albania is generally safe: https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/83/home-affairs-committee/news/195596/no-case-for-routinely-offering-asylum-to-claimants-from-safe-albania-home-affairs-committee/
More than a quarter of people crossing the Channel in small boats came from Albania in 2022, although the numbers have since then declined massively. Until recently, around half of asylum claims from Albanian nationals were initially accepted. However, a report by the House of Commons Home Affairs committee concludes that Albania is generally a safe country but with problems for certain groups, including women and victims of trafficking. Interesting, the report goes on to suggest increasing the number of work visas granted to Albanians:
"Only 325 work visas were granted to Albanian nationals in the first nine months of 2022, with evidence submitted to the inquiry arguing that a perceived difficulty in obtaining work in the UK through legal means could be driving people towards clandestine migration routes. The Committee finds that more should be done to promote the availability of visas that would fill worker shortages in the UK economy and enable some transfer of wealth back to Albania. This would include short-term or seasonal work in sectors such as construction or agriculture.”
Albania is currently on the list of safe countries to which asylum seekers can be removed with no assessment of their asylum claim under the Illegal Migration Bill.
>>> Ukrainian Extension Scheme (UES) UPDATE
Subject to the Parliamentary process, the Immigration Rules are expected to change in July 2023 to extend the eligibility for the Ukraine Extension Scheme to include those who were granted permission after 16 May and by 16 November 2023, with all applications to be made before 16 May 2024.
If you were granted permission after 16 May 2023, you will be able to apply to the Ukraine Extension Scheme once the new rules are in force in August. You should wait until more information is available then to submit your application.
>>> Gulf and Jordanian visitors to pay £10 for an Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA)
See https://www.gov.uk/government/news/gulf-and-jordanian-visitors-to-pay-10-for-an-eta
>>> Announcement of changes to student visa route: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/changes-to-student-visa-route-will-reduce-net-migration
New government restrictions to student visa routes will cut net migration while protecting the economic benefits students bring to the UK.
>>> Court of Appeal finds Rwanda plan unlawful as Rwanda is not a safe third country
The Court of Appeal has found, by a majority, that the Rwanda plan is unlawful as Rwanda is not a sufficiently safe country. In short, the Rwandan authorities are not yet reliably able to sort genuine from non-genuine refugees, and therefore there is too great a risk that genuine refugees will be returned to their home countries where they might face persecution. Afghans and Syrians, for example, currently have a 100% rejection rate in Rwanda.
>>> The 180-day absence rule doesn’t apply to people with a spouse or partner visa
Many UK immigration categories impose a requirement that the visa holder must not be outside the UK for more than 180 days in any 12-month period — that is, if the person wants to apply for indefinite leave to remain.
The good news is that this rule doesn’t apply to spouse and partner visa holders under the Appendix FM
Is there an absences limit for spouses?
In short, no. Within the Immigration Rules for spouses and partners — found in the notorious Appendix FM — you won’t find a rule that says a person holding a spouse or partner visa should not be absent from the UK for a certain number of days.
But this doesn’t mean that those using this route can get a visa, rarely set foot in the UK but expect to be able to settle here.
So be careful with the absences, in any case.
>>> Supreme Court finds exclusion of Palestinians from resettlement scheme not unlawful: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2023/23
The Supreme Court has held that there was no legal obligation to consider the equality impact of excluding Palestinians from the UK’s resettlement scheme for refugees from Syria. The design of the scheme was therefore lawful. The case is R (on the application of Marouf) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 23.
Briefly, the UK’s resettlement scheme relied on one United Nations agency, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), to select refugees for resettlement. This had the effect of excluding from the scheme the many Palestinian refugees living in Syria. This is because UNHCR is excluded from responsibility for Palestinians because they are the responsibility of a different United Nations agency, United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).
>>> New law confirms British citizenship for children of EU citizens born in UK before 2 October 2000: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/27/section/1/enacted
The British Nationality (Regularisation of Past Practice) Act 2023 came into force on 29 June 2023. It inserts a new section 50B into the British Nationality Act 1981. Section 50B definitively and retrospectively confirms the British nationality status of all children born in the UK between 1 January 1983 and 1 October 2000 to an EU citizen parent who was exercising free movement in the UK at the time of their child’s birth.
This new legislation is good. It commits a long-standing Home Office policy to the statute book, and resolves a discrepancy between law and policy which was thrown into sharp focus on 20 January 2023 in R (on the application of Roehrig) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 31 (Admin). Our detailed write-up of Roehrig is worth reading to better understand why this has become an issue now, over two decades after the period in question.
The Home Office factsheet accompanying the new legislation doesn’t want us to get too excited:
"this change does not create ‘new’ British citizens. This is about protecting the citizenship of individuals we had long considered British already under established Home Office policy."
The High Court decision in Roehrig could have had disastrous implications. Thankfully, the Home Office legislated swiftly to ensure that was not the case.
>>> No visa for Afghan interpreter accused of leaking sensitive information: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/1579
The Home Secretary was entitled to refuse entry clearance to an Afghan interpreter accused of releasing sensitive information and threatening to kill coalition forces. That was the conclusion of the High Court in FMA and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1579 (Admin), the latest judicial review concerning the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (‘ARAP’).
>>> No right to face-to-face legal advice in detention: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/764
Immigration detainees don’t have a right to face-to-face legal advice, the Court of Appeal has held in R (on the application of SPM) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 764.
SPM was held at Derwentside Immigration Removal Centre in early 2022. At the time, there were no nearby firms contracted to provide initial legally aided advice there under the Detention Duty Advice Scheme. SPM could only receive such advice by telephone or videoconferencing. She argued that her detention was unlawful because of a real risk that her common law right of access to justice would be breached if she couldn’t have an in-person legal visit.
SPM lost her case. Her fundamental problem was section 27 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This says that legal aid services can be provided ‘by telephone or other electronic means’, and there’s no duty to make an individual’s chosen method available. Even without that, the Court said, access to justice didn’t require face-to-face legal advice, particularly where it was initially limited to a 30-minute triage:
"I am not persuaded that the lack of an option, in practice, for face-to-face meetings as part of DDAS constituted an impediment to justice or created a real risk of such an impediment. At the most, it was a less than ideal way of carrying out initial legal visits for some of the women at Derwentside for some of the time".
Arrangements have changed at Derwentside; initial advice is now available face-to-face there. If and when the Illegal Migration Bill passes, however it will require a significant increase in detention capacity and, as a result, in legal visits. It remains to be seen whether the Home Office relies on SPM to justify remote-only advice on a much bigger scale.
>>> No more free appointments on Saturday, Sopra Steria says
From the Sopra Steria:
"There will be changes to the distribution of free UKVCAS appointments in about 4 weeks’ time so that there will no longer be free appointments available on a Saturday, and all free appointments will instead be on Monday to Friday. The justification provided for this change was that it would introduce equity across regions because not every UKVCAS site currently operates on a Saturday, as well as consistency with UKVI’s overseas network."
>>> Asylum decisions will be served by Email
From the Home Office:
"Regulation 7(1)(d) of the Immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003 (as amended by the Immigration (Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2008) confirms that immigration decisions can be served electronically. As such, our default position is to serve asylum decisions via email wherever possible."
>>> Dependency assumed for parents with EU Settlement Scheme family permits: https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2023-ukut-00161
A ‘dependent parent’ already admitted under the EU Settlement Scheme can get leave to remain without having to show dependency, the Upper Tribunal has held in Rexhaj (extended family members: assumed dependency) [2023] UKUT 00161 (IAC).
If applying before 30 June 2021, the parent of an EU national or of their spouse could obtain entry clearance as a ‘dependent parent’ without actually needing to prove they were dependent. Appendix EU (Family Permit) to the Immigration Rules said dependency would just be assumed. A parent who wants to stay longer than six months then needs to apply for leave to remain under Appendix EU. That Appendix does require dependency to be proven, unless the person has previously been ‘granted limited leave to enter or remain under this Appendix as a dependent parent’.
Ms Rexhaj was in this situation. The Home Office and First-tier Tribunal told her she needed to show dependency, because her leave to enter had been granted under Appendix EU (Family Permit), not under Appendix EU.
She appealed, and the Upper Tribunal concluded this was wrong. Its reasoning turned on the legal distinction between entry clearance (a visa granted before travel) and leave to enter (permission to enter the UK granted by an immigration officer on arrival). On a proper reading, Appendix EU (Family Permit) only governs entry clearance. Leave to enter is granted at the border under Appendix EU. Someone like Ms Rexhaj, therefore, has leave ‘under this Appendix’ and qualifies for an extension without needing to show dependency.
As the UT commented, the post-Brexit rules ‘do not appear to have been drafted with future (or even present) clarity in mind’. Ms Rexhaj won’t be the only person wrongly told to prove dependency after not having to do so in her first application. This decision provides welcome clarification.
>>> Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules: HC 1715 (19 July 2023) - Changes to the Visa National List: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/statement-of-changes-to-the-immigration-rules-hc-1715-19-july-2023?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=a3eaa531-10e1-4519-afb1-fc3038d5419a&utm_content=immediately
The only changes made in this statement are to Appendix Visitor:
Visa national list.
The changes came into effect TODAY, 19 July 2023, at 15:00.
Nationalities Added to the Visa National List
The following nationalities will be added the visa national list at VN 1.1(a) of Appendix Visitor: Visa national list:
- Dominica
- Honduras
- Namibia
- Timor-Leste
- Vanuatu
Transition Period for visitors with pre-booked travel to the UK
As for the general transition period, the Statement of Changes states:
"In relation to those changes, if an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or leave to remain, has been made before 19 July 2023, such applications will be decided in accordance with the Immigration Rules in force on 18 July 2023."
However, there is a provision which will allow nationals of the affected countries who have booked travel to the UK prior to the rules coming into effect to enter as a visitor without a visa for a period of 4 weeks from today.
After VN 2.2(n) of Appendix Visitor: Visa national list, the following paragraph will be inserted:
“(o) nationals or citizens of Dominica, Honduras, Namibia, TimorLeste, and Vanuatu, who hold confirmed bookings to the UK made on or before 15:00 BST 19 July 2023 where arrival in the UK is no later than 16 August 2023.”.
This exception does not apply where the person is: (a) visiting the UK to marry or to form a civil partnership, or to give notice of marriage or civil partnership, unless they are a “relevant national” as defined in section 62 of the Immigration Act 2014; or (b) seeking to visit the UK for more than 6 months.
This transition period is explained in the Explanatory Memorandum as follows:
“7.2 The imposition of these visa regimes will include a transition period for any nationals of these countries who are travelling to the UK without a visa. This period will commence at the same time as the visa regime is imposed and run until four weeks after the imposition date. During this period, those nationals who hold a confirmed booking to the UK made before the exact time of the imposition, and where arrival in the UK is no later than four weeks after the imposition, will be exempt from the visa requirement. Those booking on or after the imposition, or due to arrive in the UK four weeks after the imposition, will require a visa.
7.3 This transition period will prevent operational difficulties, general unfairness, and ensure that people who arranged travel before this announcement do not lose money. The length of the period (four weeks) has been chosen to give the nationals of these countries enough time to book and receive a visa. The current service-level agreement for processing times for visit visas is approximately 15 working days. ”.
Airside transit
In relation to airside transit passengers, who “do not need to change airports or pass through the UK border”, the Explanatory Memorandum sets out that:
“7.4 The visa impositions will also be accompanied by amendments to the Immigration (Passenger Transit Visa) Order 2014, to ensure that nationals from these countries will also require a visa when conducting airside transit travel.”
>>> British passports will be issued in the name of His Majesty for the first time since 1952: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-passports-will-be-issued-in-the-name-of-his-majesty?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=9c1b93d5-7a03-474f-9a78-3badad78f884&utm_content=immediately
>>> Upper Tribunal rules post-Brexit Zambrano appeals can continue: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2023/162.html
In a highly technical decision, Osunneye (Zambrano, transitional appeal rights) Nigeria [2023] UKUT 162 (IAC), the Upper Tribunal has concluded that Zambrano appeals may proceed notwithstanding the various Brexit regulations. The official headnote:
"1. Following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 are continued for transitional purposes by statutory instruments including the Immigration and Social Security Coordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 (Consequential, Saving, Transitional and Transitory Provisions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (SI 1309/2020).
2. Paragraph 5 of Schedule 3 to the 2020 Regulations deals with “Existing appeal rights and appeals”. Paragraph 6 of Schedule 3 then sets out the specified provisions of the EEA Regulations 2016. Neither regulation 16 nor 20 of the EEA Regulations are included in that schedule. Regulation 36 relating to appeal rights is. Schedule 2 to the EEA Regulations is also amongst the provisions continued as modified. At paragraph 6(cc), the modifications to that schedule are set out.
3. Those provisions draw a distinction between appeals which arise before or are against decisions taken before 31 December 2020 (paragraphs 5(1)(a) to (c)) and those against decisions taken after 31 December 2020 (paragraph 5(1)(d)).
4. Contrary to the unreported decision in Secretary of State for the Home Department v Oluwayemisi Janet James (UI-2021-000631; EA/05622/2020), the right of appeal against a decision made prior to 31 December 2020 therefore continues in force until finally determined (see in that regard paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 3 to the 2020 Regulations).
5. Part Four of the Withdrawal Agreement is concerned with transitional provisions which apply during the transition or implementation period between the date of the Withdrawal Agreement and 31 December 2020.
6. Part Four of the Withdrawal Agreement applies “Union law” during the transition period. The Zambrano right is a derivative one which depends on Article 20 Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The TFEU is part of “the EU Treaties”. It is continued in force during the transition period.
A decision to the contrary would have come as something of a surprise as it was surely not intended by the Home Office. Notwithstanding the surprising submissions made by a Home Office Presenting Officer and the outcome of a different, unreported appeal."
>>> The Illegal Migration Act 2023: Key points
The commencement provisions are set out at section 68, and it is important to bear in mind that much of the Act is not yet in force. If and when further provisions are brought into force, this will be done via regulations at a later date. The main provisions that came into force with Royal Assent are:
- Sections 30 to 37: Entry, settlement and citizenship
- Section 52: Judges of the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal
Section 30 prohibits a grant of entry clearance, an Electronic Travel Authority or leave to enter or remain to anyone who has arrived in the UK on or after 7 March 2023, and who meets the other three conditions set out in section 2. This is subject to certain exceptions, including for certain unaccompanied children and survivors of trafficking and where there would otherwise be a breach of human rights.
Section 31 defines an “ineligible person” as someone who has arrived since 7 March 2023 and has previously met the Section 2 conditions. This person is prohibited from registering or naturalising as a British Citizen under sections 32 to 37.
An important change since the Bill was published is that all of these provisions are no longer extended to the family members of the affected people.
>>> Post-Brexit spouses aren’t protected by the Withdrawal Agreement, Court of Appeal confirms: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/921
If you married an EU national in the UK after 31 December 2020, you can’t get leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme unless you previously had or applied for an EEA residence card or family permit as their durable partner. That remains the case even if you would have got married sooner but for the impact of Covid-19. So held the Court of Appeal in Celik v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 921, agreeing with the Upper Tribunal’s decision last year.
>>> Reminder on the Home Office and NHS Surcarge Fees increase
From the Home Office
Visa Fees
We are increasing fees across a range of immigration and nationality routes, including for people coming here to live, work and study, at a time of record high migration numbers.
Specifically, this means increasing the cost of most work and visit visas by 15% and increasing the cost of study visas, certificates of sponsorship, settlement, citizenship, wider entry clearance and leave to remain visas, and priority visas by at least 20%. We are also equalising costs for students and for those using a priority service so people pay the same whether they apply from within the UK or from outside the UK.
It is the government’s policy that those who use and benefit most from the immigration system should contribute towards the cost of operating the system, reducing the burden on the UK taxpayer.
We will lay Regulations in the Autumn when Parliament returns that will amend the fee levels.
....
Immigration Health Surcharge Uplift
We are increasing the rates of the Immigration Health Surcharge, which have remained unchanged for the last three years despite high inflation and wider pressures facing the system.
It is right that people coming to the UK for more than six months, pay their fair share towards the NHS.
Subject to final confirmation and the passage of the necessary legislation, the main rate will increase to £1,035, and the discounted rate for students, their dependents, those on Youth Mobility Schemes and under-18s will increase to £776.
>>> Tripling of fines for those supporting illegal migrants: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tripling-of-fines-for-those-supporting-illegal-migrants?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=3d71ce6a-9333-47a3-8708-486103f62739&utm_content=daily
The civil penalty for employers, which was last increased in 2014, will be raised to up to £45,000 per illegal worker for a first breach from £15,000, and up to £60,000 for repeat breaches from £20,000.
For landlords the fines will increase from £80 per lodger and £1,000 per occupier for a first breach to up to £5,000 per lodger and £10,000 per occupier. Repeat breaches will be up to £10,000 per lodger and £20,000 per occupier, up from £500 and £3,000 respectively. The higher penalties will come in at the start of 2024.
>>> Graduate Route vs Marking Boycott - the Home Office's announcement
From the Home Office:
1. UKVI will consider exercising discretion and will hold Graduate route applications made before the applicant’s results have been received, provided that the results are received within 8 weeks of the application being made.
2.Students who do not know when they will receive their results due to the boycott will be able to apply to extend their permission whilst they wait for their results. They will be exceptionally exempt from meeting the academic progression requirements. Sponsors should include a note on the Conformation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS)that the extension is due to the marking boycott.
This a discretionary arrangement, and not a concessionary policy, and is being communicated in a way that is proportionate to the nature and type of the issue covered. We encourage the sector, including sponsors, to drive the dissemination of this flexibility, as the circumstances are the result of a dispute between institutions and their employees.
>>> New immigration system: what you need to know:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-immigration-system-what-you-need-to-know?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=22176a4b-f86f-4c04-b856-06e4c2ed28c7&utm_content=immediately
>>> Ukraine Family Scheme, Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme (Homes for Ukraine) and Ukraine Extension Scheme visa data: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ukraine-family-scheme-application-data/ukraine-family-scheme-and-ukraine-sponsorship-scheme-homes-for-ukraine-visa-data--2
Total Ukraine Scheme visa applications received: 307,300
Data is as of 15 August 2023 and comprised of:
Ukraine Family Scheme: 101,500
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 205,800
Total Ukraine Scheme visas issued to people: 237,800
Data is as of 15 August 2023 and comprised of:
Ukraine Family Scheme visas: 69,800
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme visas: 168,000
Total arrivals of Ukraine Scheme visa-holders in the UK: 184,400
Data is as of 14 August 2023 and comprised of:
arrivals via Ukraine Family Scheme: 53,800
arrivals via Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 130,500
>>> Adult Dependent Relatives (ADR) Visas have the highest refusal rate ?
Between 2017 and 2020, 96% of applications were refused.
See https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-11-03/debates/EAAE3C28-2875-45F2-8EC7-A77AF5266230/AdultDependentRelativeVisas
>>> Home Office exit checks fact sheet: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exit-checks-on-passengers-leaving-the-uk/exit-checks-fact-sheet?utm_source=Free+Movement&utm_campaign=87c2abee04-Daily+forum+updates&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_792133aa40-87c2abee04-116194677&mc_cid=87c2abee04&mc_eid=1af5cd4d48
>>> BRP Delivery - New Service Provider, Royal Mail (15 September 2023)
From the Home Office:
"From Monday 18th September 2023 we will moving from FedEx/TNT to Royal Mail Group for the delivery of biometric residence permits (BRP’s). The service will continue in a similar way to the previous provider, however the key differences are as follows:
A SIGNATURE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED to receive your BRP, this will be posted through the letterbox or mailbox. In the event that delivery of the BRP is not possible redelivery will need to be arranged or the BRP can be collected from Royal Mail’s local delivery office, details of which will be provided on the ‘Something for you’ card.
Once the BRP has been produced and collected by Royal Mail for delivery YOU WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO CHANGE YOUR DELIVERY ADDRESS, please can you ensure that your address details are kept up-to-date with UKVI"
>>> Home Office Update on Availability of Super Priority Service for Family & Human Rights Applicants without visas
From the Home Office:
"The Super Priority Service (24-hour same day service) would no longer be available for applicants without valid leave to enter or remain in the UK who are applying for leave on the basis of family or private life on form FLR(FP), or on the basis of human rights or outside the rules on form FLR(HRO).
>>> Expect (long) delays in some types of the UK Visas and Immigration applications
During the ILPA conference this week it was mentioned that the Home Office is struggling to recruit new caseworkers, that they moved the existing caseworkers to their Asylum Unit and that the caseworkers are leaving the Home Office jobs. That is resulting in some applications, such as FLR(FP)/Human Rights/Private Life etc to now have 12+ months consideration time.
>>> Examples of UK vignettes: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examples-of-uk-visa-vignettes/examples-of-vignettes
>>> Ukraine Family Scheme, Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme (Homes for Ukraine) and Ukraine Extension Scheme visa data: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ukraine-family-scheme-application-data/ukraine-family-scheme-and-ukraine-sponsorship-scheme-homes-for-ukraine-visa-data--2
Total Ukraine Scheme visa applications received: 313,900
Data is as of 26 September 2023 and comprised of:
Ukraine Family Scheme: 103,500
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 210,400
Total Ukraine Scheme visas issued to people: 241,200
Data is as of 26 September 2023 and comprised of:
Ukraine Family Scheme visas: 70,300
Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme visas: 170,900
Total arrivals of Ukraine Scheme visa-holders in the UK: 187,900
Data is as of 25 September 2023 and comprised of:
arrivals via Ukraine Family Scheme: 54,500
arrivals via Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: 133,400
>>> Migration Advisory Committee recommends shortage occupation list is abolished: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-the-shortage-occupation-list-2023
The Migration Advisory Committee has recommended that the shortage occupation list is abolished and that people in the asylum system with permission to work are allowed to work in any role. These are some of the recommendations in the full review of the shortage occupation list, published yesterday.
The future of the shortage occupation list
At the outset of the report, the committee stated that they have carried out the review on the basis that employers should not be able to pay salaries lower than the “going rate”, regardless of whether there is a shortage. The current situation is that where a job is on the shortage occupation list, an employer can pay a migrant 80% of the going rate or of the minimum salary threshold of £26,200 for a skilled worker (i.e, £20,960), whichever is higher.
The committee made the point that there is no good reason why a discounted salary should be paid where an occupation is experiencing shortages. Without that discount, the benefits to being on the shortage occupation list are significantly diminished. The committee considered that the skilled worker route provides an adequate response to the needs of employers without the need for the list.
They pointed out that many employers now have unlimited access to overseas labour as long as the minimum salary of £26,200 for the skilled worker route is met. The committee commented that many employers seemed unaware of this.
The committee had discouraged stakeholders from submitting evidence in relation to higher paid roles, on the basis that inclusion on the shortage occupation list would not help them to use the immigration system more effectively. However submissions were still made, predominantly from government departments, arguing that the visa fee reduction that is available for roles on the shortage occupation list was a more than “negligible benefit”.
>>> Asylum decision making prioritisation: new caseworker guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asylum-decision-making-prioritisation-caseworker-guidance/asylum-decision-making-prioritisation-accessible
'If a claimant (or immigration advisor) needs their asylum claim considered for prioritisation they must contact the asylum decision-making team by email. When contacting the Home Office, they must explain the reason they want to have their claim prioritised and supply relevant evidence. This evidence must be supplied within 10 working days of submitting a request. If evidence is not supplied within this timeframe (without good reason) the request must be declined.'
>>> Homes for Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme: caseworker guidance: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1187614/Homes+for+Ukraine+Sponsorship+Scheme.pdf
Changes to clarify biometric requirements for the scheme.
Added definition of a legal guardian and application process for accompanied and unaccompanied children under 18.
Added instructions for decision makers handling cases from applicants who have a temporary legal guardian appointed in Poland.
Added instructions for decision makers handling duplicate cases.
Changes to the layout of the guidance for ease of reference, ensuring parity between schemes, updating as required.
Changes to add instructions on checking all systems for group applications to ensure consistency in handling.
>>> Is there a cap on the time a student may study in the UK ?
Yes, there is one.
See https://www.ukcisa.org.uk/Information--Advice/Visas-and-Immigration/Student-route-eligibility-and-requirements?q=Progression&ExactMatch=True#layer-3002
>>> Court of Appeal gives guidance on sentencing for small boats prosecutions: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2023/1121.html
The Court of Appeal in R v Ginar [2023] EWCA Crim 1121 has given guidance on the appropriate criminal sentences for those convicted for the offence of arriving (or attempting to arrive) in the UK without entry clearance, contrary to section 24(D1) of the Immigration Act 1971. The offence was introduced by the government in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 with the explicit intention of targeting small boats crossing the Channel.
The court said that the custody threshold will ‘generally be crossed’ for people arriving in the UK by small boats, placing migrants and refugees at risk of prison sentences for making the dangerous journey across the Channel. The court has confirmed that the starting sentence for the offence should be 12 months’ imprisonment.
>>> Updated Apply for asylum support: form ASF1 form: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/application-for-asylum-support-form-asf1
As always, the Home Office could not make it better but making the form on the 36 (!) pages long
>>> TLS vs Home Office. Really ?
Yes, really: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2023/2481.html
TLScontact in unsuccessful challenge to new Home Office contract.
It appears that one may start seeing changes in overseas visa processing centres soon, after TLScontact was unsuccessful in an attempt to stop the Home Office from entering into a new contract with VFS Global. The case is Teleperformance Contact Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 2481 (TCC). These proceedings are taking place in the Technology and Construction Court, part of the Business and Property Court of the High Court of Justice.
Background
TLScontact and VFS Global are both companies which manage the administrative side of visa applications for the UK and other countries, taking biometrics (photos and fingerprints) and helping with document checking and uploads as well as providing premium services for faster decisions on some applications.
On 12 July 2023 TLScontact’s parent company Teleperformance Contact Limited lodged a claim challenging the Home Secretary’s decision to award the visa processing contracts for Africa and the Middle East, the Americas, Canada, Australasia and Europe, China and Taiwan to VFS Global’s parent company, VF Worldwide Holding Limited. TLScontact was awarded the contract for services in the UK.
The effect of TLScontact lodging that claim was that the Home Secretary was prevented from entering into the contract with VFS Global under regulation 95(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. That prohibition can be lifted by interim court order. The Home Office applied for such an order and that was the issue to be decided at this hearing.
The hearing and decision
Evidence given on behalf of TLScontact was that the loss of this contract would result in closure of at least 64 of their centres, a 71% reduction in TLScontact revenue, over 750 redundancies and loss of reputation.
The court took issue with some of the evidence provided on behalf of TLScontact, pointing out that no losses could arise from the failure to award them the contract for China and Taiwan as they had no presence in those areas. The evidence also failed to mention the recent awarding to TLScontact of a contract by the Australian government to provide services in Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa, a contract they were taking over from VFS Global. TLScontact accepted that this meant they would maintain business at 10 of the locations.
The court also agreed with VFS Global that winning and losing contracts and opening and closing visa application centres is a route part of business in visa outsourcing, particularly between TLScontact and VFS Global, as the two largest operators.
The Home Office raised concerns that a further delay to their ability to enter into the new contract with VFS Global would result in, or create a very significant risk of a gap in services. TLScontact said that they would agree terms to extend the existing contracts with the Home Office. The court did not accept that this provided enough certainty as the extension would still need to be negotiated.
The court said that another relevant factor was that the new contracts will “include enhanced physical and digital security measures to standards higher than presently required; improved technology, modernisation of delivery of the services improvement to customer experience, and to contract management procedures”. Delays to these improvements would be detrimental to the wider public.
Applying the test from American Cyanamid v Ethicon [1975] AC 396, the court concluded that damages would be an adequate remedy for any loss experienced by TLScontact should it succeed in the substantive claim. It was held that the balance of convenience lay in lifting the stay and allowing the Home Office and VFS Global with the contract.
Conclusion
If the matter now proceeds to a full hearing, the court has indicated that this could take place in February or March 2024. It certainly seems from this decision that TLScontact may run into some evidential issues regarding their losses. Aside from the outcome of this case, hopefully one will see some significant improvements, as referenced above by the court, once the new contracts with VFS Global are underway.
>>> Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT)
Updated detail in the English language test providers in the UK and outside the UK
Briefly, for visa or citizenship applications, you may need to prove your knowledge of English by passing a secure English language test (SELT).
If you are in the UK
You can only take a SELT with one of the following providers:
- IELTS SELT Consortium
- LanguageCert
- Pearson
- Trinity College London
If you are outside of the UK
You can only take a SELT with one of the following providers:
- IELTS SELT Consortium
- LanguageCert
- Pearson
- PSI Services (UK) Ltd – Skills for English (UKVI)
>>> How is the Home Office prioritising asylum claims?
See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/streamlined-asylum-processing
First, there is no fixed timeframe for an asylum claim to be decided. Getting updates from the Home Office on progress, challenging delay and asking for expedition can often be a fruitless exercise.
The guidance identifies two main groups. The first group comprises people who claimed asylum before certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 were brought into force on 28 June 2022, these are referred to as ‘legacy’ cases. The PM’s commitment to clear the backlog applies only to ‘legacy’ cases.
Who does the guidance apply to?
The process set out in this guidance is separate to the questionnaire being used in the ‘streamlined asylum process’. The guidance also does not apply to asylum claims made by Albanian nationals, as those are being dealt with by a dedicated decision making unit.
The guidance identifies two main groups. The first group comprises people who claimed asylum before certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 were brought into force on 28 June 2022, these are referred to as ‘legacy’ cases. The PM’s commitment to clear the backlog applies only to ‘legacy’ cases.
The second group of cases is those made after that date, referred to as ‘flow’ cases. The newer ‘flow’ claims will not be prioritised until 2024, save in the exceptional circumstances identified below.
Children’s asylum claims should continue to be prioritised and there are two decision making units dedicated to these cases. The guidance recognises that the Home Office must carry out its functions in a way that is compatible with Section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009.
How will cases be decided?
Cases meeting the legacy criteria will be separated into groups using factors including nationality, volume of claims, grant rate, compliance rate and receipt of asylum support.
For some of these groups, a bespoke questionnaire will be issued ahead of an asylum interview. The form can be completed digitally via an online Home Office form or returned via post/email. Repeated failure to return a questionnaire risks a claim being treated as withdrawn. In the first instance this will apply to Iranian and Iraqi claims by adults as this group has the highest number of outstanding claims within the legacy backlog.
Other applicants will be invited to interview unless a decision can be made on the information already available. When a case is suitable this would be a good opportunity to ask for a decision to be made on the papers alone where there is detailed evidence to support the claim and/or where there has already been lengthy delay.
Exceptional case prioritisation
The guidance acknowledges that there are exceptional circumstances outside of the above programmes which will require prioritisation. The guidance provides a non-exhaustive list of cases that can be prioritised:
- cases involving the Hague Convention
- extradition cases
- cases involving deportation of foreign national offenders
- complex or severe physical or mental health cases
- cases of severe vulnerability – examples include but are not limited to severe safeguarding concerns such as where there has been suicidal ideation or torture and this is evidenced by relevant medical evidence, for example a medico-legal report
Requests should be in writing and sent to the main asylum casework team. Evidence must be submitted within ten working days of making the request.
Helpfully, the guidance states that expedition requests must be considered, so anyone seeking prioritisation should push for a written response. In some cases, it might be helpful to request review by a senior caseworker. Any response from the Home Office should include an indicative time frame for a decision.
Additionally, updates can be requested where six months has passed and the Home Office should respond with a time frame for decision making, as required under paragraph 333A of the immigration rules. The Home Office is however not obliged to comply with the given time frame.
Tips for expediting an asylum claim
Anyone seeking expedition should:
- ensure that the Home Office has their up to date contact details. This should mean that any communication regarding prioritisation is received and avoids the risk of their claim being treated as withdrawn;
- take this opportunity to request a decision on the papers alone where there is detailed evidence such as a medico-legal report;
- take this opportunity to request updates and seek timeframes for decision making.
It is also worth being aware of when the Home Office will consider that there is a barrier to progression of a case. This includes where they are waiting for evidence that will be important to the decision (including medico-legal reports), where there is a pending prosecution, or where there is a “change in country situation requiring an update in country information note leading to a pause in deciding cases from a particular nationality”.
Secondary asylum casework
Interestingly, the guidance also has a section called ‘secondary asylum casework’. This includes cases that have been reinstated after being withdrawn, that were considered under pre-28 June 2022 inadmissibility processes and subsequently admitted to the asylum system, and where a case has been remitted to the decision maker at the review stage of an appeal. These cases will be considered in chronological order unless they meet the above criteria for exceptional case prioritisation.
Where cases have been considered for inadmissibility since 28 June 2022 and then admitted into the asylum system they will be considered in the legacy or flow groups according to the date of application and any other relevant prioritisation criteria set out in the guidance.
>>> Home Office Cover Letter example ?
See https://www.childrenslegalcentre.com/resources/writing-covering-letter-home-office/
07 November 2023 – Just useful and interesting UK & EEA Immigration Law news and updates from the Legal Centre – Open 7 days a week - www.legalcentre.org - +44(0)3300010342, +44(0)7791145923 (WhatsApp/Viber)
>>> Prove your English language abilities with a secure English language test (SELT) - Updated list
See https://www.gov.uk/guidance/prove-your-english-language-abilities-with-a-secure-english-language-test-selt?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=5a86a411-31c6-4245-af2c-4f689f677953&utm_content=daily
>>> Permission to work for asylum seekers: Permission to work: caseworker guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/handling-applications-for-permission-to-take-employment-instruction?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications-topic&utm_source=8532c565-6257-4e39-b9a8-ba9c49064fe4&utm_content=daily
Updated casework Guidance