Welcome to the February 2017 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This episode I start with two major developments, namely the coming into force of new EEA immigration regulations and the judgment of the Supreme Court in the MM case. I run through some Home Office and enforcement news, cover some bits of immigration rule analysis we added in Febrary and end with a few tribunal cases.

The material is all drawn from the February 2017 blog posts on Free Movement.

If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a Free Movement Member. There are now over 40 CPD hours of training materials available to members. You can find all the available courses here.

If you listen to podcasts on your mobile phone, you can subscribe for free via iTunes here, Stitcher here or point your podcast player to podcast feed for Free Movement. Using a mobile device and subscribing has the advantage that each new podcast can be automatically downloaded for listening to on the go.

To access previous Free Movement immigration update podcasts click here.

The downloadable 25 minute audio podcast follows the (non chronological) order of content below:

Major developments

• New policies, processes and forms for EU nationals show hardening Home Office position
• Supreme Court upholds Minimum Income Rule of £18,600 to sponsor foreign spouses in MM case

Home Office and enforcement news

• NHS shares patient data of suspected immigration offenders with Home Office
• What is the no recourse to public funds condition?
• Border Force needs to ‘up their game’ on slavery

Immigration rule analysis

• Overstaying and applying for further leave: end of the 28 day grace period
• General grounds for refusal: owing a litigation debt to the Home Office
• General grounds for refusal: owing a debt to the NHS
• The case of Irene Clennell and the rules on returning residents with ILR

Tribunal cases

• Tribunal on meaning of absences from the UK for no more than 180 days
• Tribunal case on lapsing, cancelling and revoking ILR
• Upper Tribunal encourages parties to reach agreement on costs. Or else.