- BY Colin Yeo
Immigration update podcast, episode 45
THANKS FOR READING
Older content is locked
A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement, become a member of Free Movement to get unlimited access to all articles, and much, much more
TAKE FREE MOVEMENT FURTHER
By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features;
- Single login for personal use
- FREE downloads of Free Movement ebooks
- Access to all Free Movement blog content
- Access to all our online training materials
- Access to our busy forums
- Downloadable CPD certificates
Welcome to the September 2017 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month covers several cases, one from the Court of Appeal and the others from the Upper Tribunal. I’m also going to give a mention to some of our new explainers on different aspects of immigration law and take a look at the case of Samim Bigzad, whose case highlighted the law on contempt of court for a government minister.
The material is all drawn from the September 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 the 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 main content of the downloadable 25 minute audio podcast follows the (non chronological) order of content below:
Cases
Human rights, long residence and the integration test in the Court of Appeal
Is “residence” the same as “presence” in the Immigration Rules?
Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 continue to apply for appeals says tribunal
Deception, causation and deprivation of British citizenship
Further guidance from Upper Tribunal on withdrawal of immigration appeals
Tribunal: Home Office must prove present risk to deport EU citizens
Tribunal can (but won’t) hold Home Office in contempt for ignoring consent orders
Explainers
Explainer: Can the Home Secretary really be guilty of contempt of court for breach of a court order?
Fee waiver policy: who qualifies and what does the Home Office policy say?
Serge Aurier and visas for footballers after Brexit
Home Office sets up team to deal with high profile immigration cases
SHARE
