Eva regularly appears before immigration tribunals and the Administrative Court and has particular expertise in retained EU law post Brexit and refugee family reunion in Europe. Eva also accepts instructions in protest, employment and equality cases.
Administrative & Public Law
Eva is developing a broad public law practice. She has experience and a particular interest in complex Judicial Review challenges involving strategic litigation.
Policy work and systems challenges
Eva enjoys working on systems challenges to immigration law and policy. She has done work supporting ILPA in making representations to the Home Office advocating for legislative change.
She was also recently instructed by an international organisation to conduct a high-level risk assessment of secondary legislation aimed at implementing the immigration changes following Brexit, and how this will affect those exempt from immigration control. Her work fed into submissions made to the Government which eventually led to legislative amendments in this area.
Notable Cases
R (otao AA) v SSHD JR/482/2021
Judicial review claim against refusal of AA’s application for family reunion with his brother in the UK under the Dublin III Regulations. I was instructed alongside Rebecca Chapman. This case has been covered by The Independent.
R (otao AD) v SSHD CO/2688/2021
This is the first of a number of Judicial Review claims challenging the SSHD’s policy not to issue family permits to extended family members of EEA nationals who succeed in their applications or appeal after 30 June 2021. I am instructed alongside Emma Daykin at One Pump Court chambers. Both ILPA and Here for Good have been involved in this litigation. This has been covered by Politico and The Independent.
Contact Eva
Immigration & EU Law
Overview
Eva is a specialist in all areas of immigration law including family, asylum, deportation, detention, nationality and trafficking. She has experience and a particular interest in complex Judicial Review challenges.
Prior to joining the Bar, Eva worked for over four years, on a wide range of immigration and public law matters at Laura Devine Immigration solicitors and as an assistant to Mark Symes. Eva has particular expertise in EU free movement law and the impact of Brexit on EEA nationals and their family members. She has given training on this topic on behalf of ILPA (her trainer profile can be accessed here) and for solicitors in-house. She also drafted Practice Notes on the EU Settlement Scheme for Lexis Nexis and Thompson Reuters Practical Law.
Notable Cases
R (otao AA) v SSHD JR/482/2021
Judicial review claim against refusal of AA’s application for family reunion with his brother in the UK under the Dublin III Regulations. I was instructed alongside Rebecca Chapman. This case has been covered by The Independent.
R (otao AD) v SSHD CO/2688/2021
This is the first of a number of Judicial Review claims challenging the SSHD’s policy not to issue family permits to extended family members of EEA nationals who succeed in their applications or appeal after 30 June 2021. I am instructed alongside Emma Daykin at One Pump Court chambers. Both ILPA and Here for Good have been involved in this litigation. This has been covered by Politico and The Independent.
Eva was instructed by an international organisation to conduct a high-level risk assessment of secondary legislation aimed at implementing the immigration changes following Brexit, and how this will affect those exempt from immigration control. Her work fed into submissions made to the Government which eventually led to legislative amendments in this area.
Contact Eva
Equality and Employment Law
Eva has a strong interest in employment law, particularly discrimination challenges under the Equality Act 2010. She has worked alongside Nicola Braganza in complex litigation on indirect discrimination on grounds of race and age before the Employment Tribunal in Essop v UKBA. This followed the landmark Supreme Court case of Essop & Ors v Home Office [2017] UKSC 27. Eva also assisted Nicola with a high-profile sexual orientation direct discrimination and victimisation claim against the Ministry of Justice, Plaistow v SSJ. She accepts instructions to represent individuals before the Employment Tribunal.
