Category Archives: Judicial Review

Challenging the Restriction on Alvi’s Scope

Like its predecessor Statement of Changes Cm8423, the explanatory memorandum to Statement of Changes HC 565 expressed the government’s regret in relation to the fact that the changes to the Immigration Rules did not (yet again) comply fully with the … Continue reading

Posted in Alvi, Article 8, Judicial Review, Pankina, PBS, Sedley LJ, UKSC | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

R (Thamby) v SSHD: LTTE, nationality, naturalisation and “good character”

This judicial review case – Thamby, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 1763 read judgment here – concerned the SSHD’s refusal to naturalise as a citizen a Tamil national of Sri … Continue reading

Posted in Cases, ECHR, False Statements, Genocide, International Law, Judicial Review, Nationality, Persecution, Sri Lanka | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Immigration cap declared unlawful by High Court

In the High Court Lord Justice Sullivan and Mr Justice Burton have declared that Mrs Theresa May unlawfully side-steped Parliamentary scrutiny when setting the limits to Tiers 1 and 2 which she introduced in July 2010. Since Sedley LJ  restored constitutional order in … Continue reading

Posted in AP (Russia), Employment, Immigration Cap, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Tier 1, Tier 2 | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

New Pankina announcement

In Pankina – or AP (Russia) – Sedley LJ asked the SSHD and the UKBA to refrain from using policy guidance to modify the immigration rules because the policy guidance had not been approved by Parliament. While the UKBA is trying … Continue reading

Posted in AP (Russia), Court of Appeal, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Pankina, PBS, Post Study Work, Tier 1, Tier 2 | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Immigration cap faces judicial review challenge

The Coalition government introduced the immigration cap on 28 June 2010. The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) has reported that it will challenge the cap in the High Court by way of JR proceedings. The JCWI’s response to the cap … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Business, Dependants, ECHR, Economy, Employment, Immigration Cap, Immigration Law, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Overseas Clients, Overseas Workers, Pankina, PBS, Settlement, Tier 1, Tier 2, UKBA, Working | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pankina, Tribunal Cases, Judicial Review, and Overseas Applicants

The Pankina judgment or “AP (Russia)” – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Pankina [2010] EWCA Civ 719 - was a big blow to the Home Secretary and its manifestations are reflected in emergent case law. In R (on … Continue reading

Posted in AP (Russia), Article 8, Cases, Constitution, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Immigration Law, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Nigeria, Pankina, Tier 1, Tier 2 | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Pre-23 June Overseas Applications, the Pankina Judgment, and Judicial Review

The Pankina Policy: Reliefs and Exclusions Subsequent to the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Secretary of State for the Home Department v Pankina [2010] EWCA Civ 719, the Points Based System Maintenance (Funds): Policy Document produced by the UKBA selectively … Continue reading

Posted in AP (Russia), Article 8, Cases, Constitution, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Immigration Law, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Pankina, PBS, Post Study Work, Tier 1, Tier 2, UKBA | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment