Free Movement Weekly Newsletter #88

Welcome to the weekly Free Movement newsletter! 

Over the weekend, four people died on their way to the UK to seek safety – a man, two women and a child. The UK government has apparently put up signs around Calais warning that anyone crossing the Channel to the UK will be at risk of being returned to France, as though that is a bigger deterrent than the risk of death.

Meanwhile, the Home Secretary was in the Court of Appeal last week, with counsel leaning heavily on the supposed deterrent effect of the policy as the reason that the High Court’s grant of interim relief in a single man’s case should be overturned. The court rose without hearing from his lawyers and the application was dismissed. The hearing is quite short and is worth a watch I think (especially if you are a lawyer struggling to follow what is actually going on from media write ups – it’s CTK in here).

A family of three, including a young child, have arrived in the UK under the part of the scheme which provides a formal route for people to apply to come from France. They would not be here if not for a scheme which detains and traumatises others who crossed the Channel, immediately throwing them into an unfair process. Those lauding the arrival of that family and pushing for the expansion of the scheme should remember what is on the other side of this particular coin.

On Free Movement, as promised I have written two explainers in response to the Home Secretary’s recent comments. Today we have published an explainer of how the modern slavery identification process is not in fact, being abused, but has instead been gamed by the Home Office against the recognition of survivors. This is particularly the case with those targeted for removals to France. 

I also wrote an explainer of the work that actually goes into a removal challenge and why that means that the court or tribunal is often only deciding these things close to the flight time. Again this is a system that has been designed by the government to ensure that challenges are as difficult as possible, because they do not want people to be able to make them at all. It’s been a hot minute since I last lodged a removal judicial review, so thank you to Imogen Townley at Wilsons for helping me out with the current state of affairs. 

There were also a couple of case write ups, a SIAC case looking at procedural fairness in visitor applications and a look at supplementary employment in an unsuccessful challenge to cancellation of leave by a care worker. For everything else on Free Movement and elsewhere, read on.

Cheers, Sonia

What we’re reading

Free conference: International Protection in the Context of the Climate Crisis: Legal Strategies for UK Practice and Policy – Refugee Legal Support, Earth Refuge and DLA Piper

Threats against immigration lawyers ‘have intensified’ – Law Gazette, 22 September

Man who died on Bibby Stockholm ‘tricked’ into going on barge, inquest told – The Guardian, 22 September

High standard of English to be required for leave to remain, Mahmood to pledge – The Guardian, 28 September

Reeves pushes for EU youth migration scheme ahead of Budget – BBC News, 27 September

Labour considers cutting migrant benefits – but faces three big stumbling blocks – The i Paper, 25 September

Permanent residency for Hongkongers may be worth £4bn to UK economy, says thinktank – The Guardian, 23 September

Illegal working and streams of taxis – BBC gains rare access inside asylum hotels – BBC News, 23 September