Tag Archives: Spouses

NAO report: Home Office is not delivering value for money

The report on Immigration Enforcement by the National Audit Office (NAO) makes poor reading for the Home Office because it “does not yet have a full understanding of how its activities affect the progress those people take through each part … Continue reading

Posted in Access to Justice, Appeals, Appendix FM, Article 8, Asylum, Culture, Deportation, Detention, Families, Fees, Hostile Environment, Immigration Rules, NAO, Windrush | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mother of British child fails on Chikwamba and Zambrano

Younas (section 117B(6)(b); Chikwamba; Zambrano) [2020] UKUT 129 (IAC)(24 March 2020)  Chikwamba [2008] UKHL 40 and Zambrano (C-34/09, EU:C:2011:124) were landmark cases. The Chikwamba principle is that there is no public interest in removing a person from the UK in … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix FM, Article 8, Asylum, Children, CJEU, COVID-19, ECHR, European Union, Human Rights Act, Immigration Rules, Judges, Pakistan, Proportionality, Public Interest, Removals, Spouses, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Royal Marine gambler with two sons loses deportation battle

LE (St Vincent and the Grenadines) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 505 (07 April 2020)  The Court of Appeal has held that section 117C(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 applies … Continue reading

Posted in Afghan War, Appeals, Article 8, Children, Court of Appeal, Deportation, ECHR, Families, Immigration Act 2014, Iraq, Proportionality, Public Interest, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Domestic violence claim is not a human rights claim 

MY (refusal of human rights claim: Pakistan) [2020] UKUT 89 (IAC) (27 February 2020)  This decision brings further detriment to applicants relying on the domestic violence rules to obtain leave to remain. The result is that the Home Office can … Continue reading

Posted in Appeals, Appendix FM, Article 3, Article 8, COVID-19, Domestic Violence, ECHR, Hostile Environment, Human Rights Act, Immigration Act 2014, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Pakistan, Settlement, Spouses, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Zambrano carers: The test of compulsion is a practical test

Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] UKSC 59 (16 December 2019) Addressing the scope of the substance of rights test devised in Zambrano (C-34/09, EU:C:2011:124), whereby a non-member state national (or a third country national “TCN”) … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix EU, Article 8, Brexit, CFR, Citizenship and Nationality, CJEU, European Union, EUSS, Human Rights, Settlement, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Algerian father of five British children loses deportation battle 

OH (Algeria) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1763 (24 October 2019)  The Court of Appeal has held that in considering a challenge to the deportation of a foreign national offender under section 117C of … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Asylum, Children, Court of Appeal, Deportation, ECHR, Immigration Rules | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Changes in the Immigration Rules: Key Features of HC170

Statement of changes to the Immigration Rules HC 170 amends the Immigration Rules to reflect changes required if the UK leaves the EU without a deal. The changes affect EU, other EEA and Swiss citizens, and their family members. In order … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix EU, Brexit, Crime, Deportation, European Union, EUSS, Families, Free Movement, Immigration Rules, Spouses, Turkey | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Brexit and the Euro TLR Scheme 

After being installed as Home Secretary, Priti Patel, pounced on the opportunity to declare that free movement would end with a no-deal Brexit on 31 October 2019. She then made a u-turn. But her misguided comments caused a surge in … Continue reading

Posted in Brexit, Citizens Directive, CJEU, European Union, EUSS, Free Movement, Immigration Law, MAC, PBS, Settlement | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jamaican father of six British children loses in Court of Appeal 

The Secretary of State for the Home Department v PG (Jamaica) [2019] EWCA Civ 1213 (11 July 2019) This is another tale of a father with six British children who lost his case in the Court of Appeal. Floyd, Hickinbottom … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Automatic Deportation, Children, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Families, Immigration Rules, Jamaica, Public Interest, UKBA 2007 | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Stranded Sri Lankan father wins on Article 8 in Court of Appeal 

UT (Sri Lanka) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1095 (26 June 2019) Floyd and Coulson LJJ have provided an outline of the proper approach that the Upper Tribunal should take as regards immigration … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Children, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Entry Clearance, False Statements and Misrepresentations, Families, Immigration Rules, Lady Hale, Proportionality, Public Interest, Settlement, Spouses, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Upper Tribunal’s view of ‘unduly harsh’ and ‘very compelling circumstances’ tests in section 117C after KO (Nigeria)

In RA (section 117C: “unduly harsh”: offence: seriousness) Iraq [2019] UKUT 123 (IAC) together with MS (section 117C(6): “very compelling circumstances”) Philippines [2019] UKUT 122 (IAC) which were heard consecutively, the Upper Tribunal considered how section 117C (article 8: additional considerations in cases … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Asylum, Children, Court of Appeal, Deportation, ECHR, Families, Immigration Act 2014, Immigration Rules, Iraq, Precariousness, Proportionality, Public Interest, Settlement, Spouses, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Has Chavez-Vilchez altered the approach to derivative claims for residence in the UK?

Sarmiento and Sharpston view Zambrano (C-34/09, EU:C:2011:124), which caused a stir because of the substance of rights test, as a “high-water mark” in the CJEU’s jurisprudence. Thereafter, the court began to suffer from “citizenship exhaustion” and the “test was shelved … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix EU, Article 8, CFR, Children, Citizens Directive, CJEU, Court of Appeal, ECHR, European Union, Families, Immigration Rules, Netherlands, Pakistan, Settlement, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Section 117B(6) after KO (Nigeria): Presidential panel allows dishonest Turkish mother’s appeal

JG (section 117B(6): “reasonable to leave” UK) Turkey [2019] UKUT 72 (IAC) (15 February 2019) The Supreme Court’s decision in KO (Nigeria) [2018] UKSC 53 (discussed here) was a seminal judgment. Yet it was seen as “deeply unsatisfactory” in some … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Children, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Entry Clearance, Human Rights Act, Immigration Act 2014, Immigration Rules, Proportionality, Public Interest, Tribunals, Turkey, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Deemed Paternity and Discrimination: Section 50(9A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 is Incompatible with the ECHR

K (A Child) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWHC 1834 (Admin) (18 July 2018) Importantly, the Administrative Court has recently held that the scheme in section 50(9A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 which deemed … Continue reading

Posted in Article 14, Article 8, Children, Citizenship and Nationality, ECHR, Hostile Environment, Human Rights Act, Judicial Review, Spouses, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Court of Appeal: Guidance on Entry Clearance and MIR

Secretary of State for the Home Department v MS (Pakistan) [2018] EWCA Civ 1776 (27 July 2018) The Supreme Court’s ruling in MM (Lebanon) [2017] UKSC 10 permitted the operation of the Minimum Income Requirement (MIR) for partners in Appendix … Continue reading

Posted in Appeals, Appendix FM, Blake J, Children, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Entry Clearance, Immigration Rules, MIR, Precariousness, Proportionality, Spouse visa, Spouses, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Court of Appeal: ‘Indiscriminate Methods of Warfare’ in Gaza

MI (Palestine) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1782 (31 July 2018) Holding that it is sufficiently arguable that the situation in Gaza is attributable to direct and indirect actions of parties to the conflict … Continue reading

Posted in Article 3, Asylum, Automatic Deportation, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Egypt, Gaza, Israel, Palestine, Persecution, Politics, Somalia, Terrorism, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Banger: EFMs are Covered by Surinder Singh

In Banger (C-89/17, EU:C:2018:570), the CJEU recently held that the historic decision in Surinder Singh (C-370/90, EU:C:1992:296) applies to an extended family member (EFM) and where an EU citizen returns to his member state of origin it must facilitate the … Continue reading

Posted in Appeals, Brexit, Citizens Directive, CJEU, European Union, Free Movement, OFMs, Permanent Residence, Spouses, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Court of Appeal on Counting Time under the EEA Regulations

Macastena v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1558 (05 July 2018) The Court of Appeal has answered in the negative the question whether a person in a durable relationship with an EEA national holding permanent … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Citizens Directive, CJEU, Court of Appeal, European Union, Permanent Residence, Spouses, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

CJEU Cases and Changes to the EEA Regulations 2016

The Immigration (European Economic Area)(Amendment) Regulations 2018 amend the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 in order to implement the effects of a string of judgments given by the CJEU. The new regulations come into force on 24 July 2018. … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix EU, Article 8, Brexit, Children, Citizens Directive, CJEU, Deportation, European Union, Families, Free Movement, Judicial Review, Permanent Residence, Spouses | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Tier 1 (General): Perspectives on Paragraph 322(5) and ILR

Cases in the Tier 1 (General) category present an outrage because we would not really expect highly skilled migrants to be punished for being honest by paying their taxes. Similarly, we would also not expect migrants who add value to … Continue reading

Posted in Appeals, Article 8, Cases, ECHR, False Statements and Misrepresentations, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Misconduct, Pakistan, Paragraph 322(5), PBS, Post Study Work, Proportionality, Public Interest, Tier 1, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments