Immigration Law Bulletin - Issue 336 – 6 August 2013

Tuesday 6 August 2013

Share This Page

Email This Page

Immigration Law News

The statement of changes in the Immigration Rules (Cm 8690) came into force on 1 August 2013. The accompanying Explanatory Note sets out that:

"The purpose of these changes is to amend the Immigration Rules to:

  • Incorporate compulsory screening for active pulmonary tuberculosis for migrants coming to the UK for over six months from Mauritania and to clarify the requirement that in China, Hong Kong and Macau, only individuals applying for settlement visas need to undergo screening.
  • Amend the current Rules for Tier 4 dependants. On 1 July the Rules were changed to make them clearer and easier to use. Those amendments specify that a Tier 4 migrant may bring dependants if they are studying a postgraduate level course at a Higher Education Institution (HEI) for "longer than 12 months". These changes will amend the Rules so that they properly reflect the policy position, which is that postgraduate students at HEIs may bring dependants if they are studying a course of duration "12 months or longer"."

Immigration Law Cases

Navaratnam v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2383 (QB) 31 July 2013
The Administrative Court noted that decisions of the Strasbourg Court confer no rights in this jurisdiction beyond recording that Court's decision that a person's removal would violate Article 3 rights: they do not indicate the legal basis upon which leave to remain should consequently be given. For the full judgement, click here.

L1 v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 906 29 July 2013
The Court of Appeal found that whilst it was not illegitimate for the Secretary of State to intentionally withdraw a person's nationality whilst they were abroad, fairness is likely to require the extension of time for lodging notice of appeal if they have been disadvantaged by this process. For the full judgment, click here.

Kebede & Anor, R (on the application of) v Newcastle City Council [2013] EWCA Civ 960 31 July 2013
The Administrative Court found that the need to husband scarce resources and to spend money on those who would be staying in this country justified any discrimination arising from the failure to make provision for student loans of those with Discretionary Leave to Remain. For the full judgment, click here.

MA (Somalia), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 966 30 July 2013
The Court of Appeal considered the (now defunct) policy to consider asylum applications from abroad and noted that whether the applicants were refugees as defined by the Geneva Convention was a quite distinct question from whether they were applicants seeking asylum. However, the Secretary of State would not necessarily be irrational in taking the view that further material might arise which would weaken claims which were prima facie strong because of prevalent Strasbourg authority. For the full judgment, click here,

R v Mateta & Ors, [2013] EWCA Crim 1372 30 July 2013
Leveson LJ in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) emphasised the availability of the "refugee" defence against prosecution for use of false documents. The fact a refugee stopped in a third country in transit is not necessarily fatal and may be explicable: the refugee has some choice as to where he might properly claim asylum, and the main touchstones by which exclusion from protection should be judged are the length of the stay in the intermediate country, the reasons for delaying there and whether or not the refugee sought or found protection de jure or de facto from the persecution from which he or she was seeking to escape. The requirement that the refugee demonstrates "good cause" for his illegal entry or presence in the United Kingdom will be satisfied by him showing he was reasonably travelling on false papers. There is an obligation on those representing defendants charged with an offence of possession of an identity document with improper intention to advise them of the existence of a possible section 31 defence if the circumstances and instructions generate the possibility of mounting this defence, and they should explain its parameters. For the full judgment, click here.

Hashemi, R (on the application of) v The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor [2013] EWHC 2316 (Admin) 31 July 2013
The Administrative Court found that there is a presumption that a Claimant was properly advised even though a child, and took an informed and advised decision as to the course he wished to take in respect of an appeal absent evidence of any mistake of professional judgment or otherwise. An Immigration Judge could not be criticised, notwithstanding that they had got the law on family tracing wrong vis-á-vis the insufficiency of a child being put in contact with the Red Cross, where no further information would have been forthcoming had the relevant enquiries been made. For the full judgment, click here.

Immigration Law Training

Advanced Naturalisation
ILPA, Wednesday 4 September 2013, London

Speakers include Adrian Berry of Garden Court Chambers.
For further information, click here.

LAA (LSC) 2 / OISC 3 Accreditation
HJT Training, Tuesday 10 September to Friday 13 September 2013

For further information, click here.

Dealing with Disaster: sponsor licence revocations, suspensions and associated problems
ILPA, Wednesday 11 September 2013, London

For further information, click here.

Judicial Review Conference 2013 + HJT's 10 Year Anniversary.
5 CPD, Tuesday 22 October 2013, London.

The conference features leading immigration and asylum practitioners who will discuss the implications of the latest developments in judicial review in the immigration field. Speakers include Stephen Knafler QC, Mark Symes and David Jones of Garden Court Chambers.
For further information, click here.

JUSTICE Human Rights Law Conference
6 CPD, Thursday 24 October 9.30am-5pm,
Bloomsbury Hotel, London

Now in its 15th year, this annual conference is the acknowledged forum for ensuring that delegates are fully up to date with developments in human rights law. Speakers include Duran Seddon of Garden Court Chambers.
For further information, click here.

We are top ranked by independent legal directories and consistently win awards.

+ View more awards