In 1985, immigration solicitor Sheona York read an article in the Guardian about a new technology for proving someone’s identity. She called the inventor, Professor
The “Surinder Singh route” has become well known to British citizens seeking to be reunited with their family members. The toughening up of UK immigration
I am quoted in a recent Guardian story about the notorious, if niche, paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules. This is the rule being used
Yesterday’s judgment in Aziz & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1884 saw the Court of Appeal uphold the Home
Welcome to the June 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. I start this month with a whistle-stop tour of some of the
New figures from the Home Office show that hundreds of British citizens have unlawfully had their citizenship nullified since 2013. A Freedom of Information request
The unmarried partner of a British citizen who returns to the UK having resided in another EU country does have rights under EU law, the
Welcome to the May 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. It was a bumper month for immigration and asylum law updates, with
Home Office profit on the fees charged to children exercising their right to British citizenship comes to nearly £100 million over the past five years,
Since 2014 the Upper Tribunal has permitted the Home Office double the normal time limit set by the procedure “rules” for responding to an application
In 1985, immigration solicitor Sheona York read an article in the Guardian about a new technology for proving someone’s identity. She called the inventor, Professor Alec Jeffreys, at the University of Leicester to see whether this “DNA testing” could help to resolve an immigration dispute. The Home Office was demanding...
The “Surinder Singh route” has become well known to British citizens seeking to be reunited with their family members. The toughening up of UK immigration rules in July 2012 – particularly the introduction of the minimum income rule with its labyrinthine documentary requirements, and the awful elderly dependent relative rules...
I am quoted in a recent Guardian story about the notorious, if niche, paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules. This is the rule being used to refuse leave to remain to migrants because of alleged discrepancies between their tax returns to HMRC and the income declared to the Home Office...
Yesterday’s judgment in Aziz & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1884 saw the Court of Appeal uphold the Home Secretary’s decision to use her power to strip members of a notorious Rochdale grooming gang of their British citizenship. The use of a power...
Welcome to the June 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. I start this month with a whistle-stop tour of some of the latest changes to the Immigration Rules before highlighting a couple of procedural changes, including the end of special deadlines for the Home Office in judicial...
New figures from the Home Office show that hundreds of British citizens have unlawfully had their citizenship nullified since 2013. A Freedom of Information request by the author revealed that there were 262 decisions to nullify British citizenship between 2007 and 2017, peaking at 176 cases in 2013. In December...
Welcome to the May 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. It was a bumper month for immigration and asylum law updates, with 61 posts published on Free Movement in May. I can’t possibly cover everything, but the highlights include an important High Court intervention on automatic detention...
Home Office profit on the fees charged to children exercising their right to British citizenship comes to nearly £100 million over the past five years, Free Movement analysis has shown. The controversially high fee for the citizenship process known as registration — set this year at £1,012 — is far...
Since 2014 the Upper Tribunal has permitted the Home Office double the normal time limit set by the procedure “rules” for responding to an application for judicial review. Instead of having the 21 days proscribed by the “rules” to respond to a claim, in a case called Kumar [2014] UKUT...
