Immigration Law News

For the Home Office’s report: “Impacts of migration on UK native employment: An analytical review of the evidence”, click here.

From 1 April 2014, the British Refugee Council and Migrant Helpline will provide advice services to asylum seekers and refugees. To read further, click here.

For updated register of licensed sponsors: workers (Tiers 2 & 5), click here.

Immigration Law Cases

Syed & Another, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 196 (4 March 2014)
In joined appeals, the Court of Appeal: (1) held that the expression “a UK recognised bachelor or postgraduate degree” in Table 10 of Appendix A to the Immigration Rules referred to a UK bachelor’s or postgraduate degree and not to a qualification of equivalent level to a degree and that accordingly the ACCA professional qualifications are not eligible for points as “a UK recognised bachelor or postgraduate degree” under Table 10 or by virtue of the guidance; (2) rejected the contentions that there had been any unlawful delegation to the National Recognition Information Centre for the United Kingdom (“UK NARIC”), it being sufficient that the Rules provided that the relevant criterion affecting entitlement to leave to remain was that points would be awarded for academic qualification only if the qualification was deemed by UK NARIC to meet or exceed the requisite standard of a relevant degree in the UK.

Nzangane, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 555 (Admin) (5 March 2014)
A ‘legacy case’ in which Green J rejected the contention that, on the basis of §7.44 of the report by Sir John Vine, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, entitled “An Inspection of the UK Border Agency’s Handling of Legacy Asylum and Immigration cases” March-July 2012, (“The Vine Report”), a “compelling” reasons policy existed with the asserted effect that the claimant, who claimed to fall within such a ‘policy’, should have been granted indefinite leave to remain rather than discretionary leave to remain for three years.

RQ (Jordan), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 559 (Admin) (5 March 2014)
A successful ‘Cart’ judicial review in which the challenge to the First-tier Tribunal’s (FTT) determination was that the FTT Judge had refused to adjourn the ‘detained fast-track’ hearing in order for the Palestinian claimant to obtain evidence to corroborate his claim to have renounced his Jordanian nationality. The Upper Tribunal had refused permission to appeal based on an assumption that the claimant’s assertions about his nationality might have been true. Subsequent to the grant of permission to proceed with the claim for judicial review (it being accepted that the ‘second appeals’ test provisions applied only to the grant of permission stage and not to the substantive judicial review) it had become accepted that on the one hand the claimant’s Jordanian nationality had indeed been revoked but that, on the other hand, this had been done by means of a false and forged document. Nonetheless, Philip Mott QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered that (1) the issue of credibility in relation to nationality had been so prominent in the FTT decision, that it must be at least arguable that a decision-maker would have difficulty in putting an adverse finding on that issue out of her mind when considering credibility in relation to the alleged fear of persecution, such that the UT Judge had erred in refusing permission to appeal; and (2) to refuse the application now on the basis that the revealed truth does not on balance assist the Claimant on the issue of credibility, would be wrong, because (a) such a course would rightly lead to feelings of resentment that such an important decision was made on a false basis of fact and (b) this was an asylum claim, where the issue is of a fear of persecution and death if returned to Jordan and such cases demand the most anxious scrutiny, and the highest standards of fairness.

Omokayode, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 594 (Admin) (6 March 2014)
Yet another ‘legacy case. The claimant, having been granted three years’ discretionary leave (DLR) and not indefinite leave to remain (ILR), sought unsuccessfully to persuade Andrews J that her case was distinguishable from R (Geraldo, Aroun and Iqbal) v SSHD [2013] EWHC 2763 (Admin) and R (Mohammed) v SSHD [2014] EWHC 98 (Admin) and that because her claim to ILR was so compelling, she was entitled to an explanation from the Defendant as to why it was being refused and DLR granted instead.

Immigration Law Training

Article 8 Update
ILPA, Tuesday 11 March 2014, 16:00, London
Garden Court’s Sonali Naik along with David Chirico return with this popular course that will ensure that you are fully up to date with all the latest case law, rules and developments and are thus equipped to identify and deal with Article 8 points arising in your practice.
For more information, click here.

Asylum Law Update
HJT Training, Thursday 13 March 2014, 16:00, London
Garden Court’s Mark Symes explains developments in asylum law.
For more information, click here.

Current issues in securing protection for victims of trafficking
ILPA, Tuesday 18 March 2014, 16:00, London
This session will provide an update on the different routes to obtaining protection for victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation/ criminal activity/ domestic servitude and labour exploitation who have an immigration problem.
For more information, click here.

Getting started in business immigration law
ILPA, Wednesday 19 March 2014, 16:00, London
ILPA’s popular introduction to business immigration law, suitable for those who want to get started, fill in gaps in their knowledge or get up-to-date. A comprehensive and comprehensible guide to this fast-changing area.
For more information, click here.

Immigration Bill Online Q&A
Wednesday 19 March from 13:00 to 14:00
Refugee Action are hosting an online Q&A session examining the Immigration Bill. Panellists include Adrian Berry of Garden Court Chambers.
For more details and to submit questions in advance, click here.

Immigration Law Books

Garden Court Chambers Immigration Team members are authors of numerous books which we mention from time to time.

Immigration Practice and Procedure in Family Proceedings
This practical new work by Nadine Finch, Omar Shibli, Anthony Vaughan concentrates on the immigration procedures, law and rules relevant to family proceedings. Price: £60.00. For full details click here.

Asylum Law and Practice (2nd edition)
The second edition of Asylum Law and Practice by Mark Symes and Peter Jorro has been published. Price: £138.00. For full details click here.

Fransman’s British Nationality Law (3rd edition)
The third edition of Fransman’s British Nationality Law, written by Laurie Fransman QC and with contributions from Adrian Berry and Alison Harvey, was published in spring 2011. Price: £295.00. For full details click here.

Macdonald’s Immigration Law & Practice (8th edition)
The eighth edition of Macdonald’s Immigration Law & Practice was written by Ian Macdonald QC with contributions from many members of the Garden Court Immigration Team. Price: £230.00. For full details click here.

Human Trafficking Handbook
Nadine Finch has contributed to the Human Trafficking Handbook: Recognising Trafficking and Modern-Day Slavery in the UK. Price: £36.00. For full details, click here.