Movement Weekly Immigration Newsletter #82

Welcome to the weekly Free Movement newsletter! 

Shortly after the immigration white paper was published, two petitions against the doubling of the settlement period from five to ten years in two specific routes hit the 100,000 threshold required for the government to consider holding a debate on the issue. Keeping the five year route to settlement in the skilled worker and Hong Kong BN(O) routes will be the subject of a Westminster Hall debate on 8 September 2025. The House of Commons library have published a briefing ahead of the debate. 

I mentioned this in the newsletter earlier this year, but the US State Department has published its “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices” and these are no longer reliable, which means that extreme caution should be exercised when relying on them. In light of these extremely serious concerns, it will be important to monitor whether or not the Home Office continues to reference the reports in its country policy and information notes. If they do, this will need to be checked and challenged where appropriate. 

The Unity Project has published its latest analysis of the Home Office data on change of conditions applications submitted by people who need to have the no recourse to public funds restriction lifted from their grant of leave. There has been a significant increase in Home Office decision making, leading to a decrease in the backlog of applications, however success rates have dropped significantly. On the same topic, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has recently published a report looking at the dire situation and hardship experienced by families who are subject to the condition.

On Free Movement, today Niamh Fegan takes a look at some common issues that arise with bail conditions. Last week I updated our briefing on the inadmissibility process in asylum applications, given it is once again relevant in light of the new UK/France returns agreement. 

There were several cases covered on the blog, including an appeal against an Immigration Advice Authority decision, an Afghan driver who unsuccessfully challenged the refusal of his resettlement application, and a successful procedural fairness challenge in a Hong Kong application. If you work on trafficking cases where a public order disqualification is threatened, then this post and the associated case are both useful. And if you want to ruin your Monday – this is the case to read.

For everything else on Free Movement and elsewhere, read on.

Cheers, Sonia

What we’re reading

SRA concerned by solicitors’ lack of ‘meaningful reflection’ on training – Law Gazette, 12 August

Rebuke for allowing unqualified caseworker to submit ‘meritless’ JR bid – Law Gazette, 13 August

People held under UK’s ‘one in, one out’ asylum deal say they had not heard of it – The Guardian, 14 August

Court of Appeal rules pre-settled status holders are not automatically eligible for housing assistance – The 3 million, 13 August

Scottish Scout group ‘mistaken for refugees’ suffer racist abuse – The National, 12 August

Double Betrayal: Afghan Refugees Abandoned and Endangered – sounddelivery, 15 August

IMA raises concerns about travel difficulties for EU Settlement Scheme applicants – Independent Monitoring Authority, 11 August

UK visa services firm sues ex-boss for £6m over alleged improper use of profits – The Guardian, 12 August

‘You don’t see many locals at anti-migrant protests’: Kent residents work for community cohesion – The Guardian, 16 August

One Step Forward, Three Steps Back? The Alace Judgment and the Future of the ‘Safe Country of Origin’ Practice – EU Law Analysis, 14 August