Issue 35 - 20th November

Monday 20 November 2006

Share This Page

Email This Page

Parliament

New Immigration Bill: There is to be a new immigration bill introduced in the 2006-2007 Parliamentary session. The Border and Immigration bill is to give the immigration service extra powers in relation to border control and immigration related crime. Apparently, it will also make it easier for the Home Office to deport those convicted of criminal offences. There will be a statutory presumption of deportation for those committing serious crimes and a reduction in appeal rights for those challenging deportation.

Among the new powers and forms of control, there will be further powers to take biometric details from foreign nationals and new powers to arrest persons, seize cash, force the forfeiture of goods and dispose of assets. There will also be powers to facilitate the sharing of information with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The extra powers will be exercised by the new border and immigration agency.

The Immigration (Leave to Remain) (Prescribed Forms and Procedures) (Amendment No. 2) Regulations 2006 2006/2899 in force 8 November 2006. The Regulations provide for a new FLR (IED) form for applications for limited leave to remain (i) for work permit employment, (ii) as a seasonal agricultural worker, (iii) for the purpose of the Sectors-Based Scheme and (iv) for Home Office approved training or work experience. The Regulations also provide for a new FLR (HSMP) for limited leave to remain as a highly skilled migrant. Provision is also made transitional arrangements. Click Here

Asylum And Immigration Tribunal

A number of amendments have been made to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal Practice Direction. These came into force on 13 November 2006. For a list of amendments and for a consolidated version of the Practice Direction, 
Click Here 

Cases

Luluyev and Others v Russia:  App No. 69480/01 European Court of Human Rights 9 November 2006. This case concerns the responsibility of Russia for the abduction and killing of a woman in Chechnya by military servicemen. The case was brought by her close relatives. The Court found a violation of Article 2 ECHR in respect of the disappearance, death and failure to investigate the death of the Nura Luluyeva, a violation of Article 3 ECHR in respect of the treatment of the close relatives and further violations of Article 5 ECHR and Article 13 ECHR.

Chateignier v Office national de l’emploi (ONEM) C-346/05 European Court of Justice November 2006. A French national married a Belgian national and acquired Belgian nationality as a result. She brought proceedings against the Belgian ONEM for the refusal to grant unemployment benefit as she had not completed at least one day’s employment in Belgium on the date she claimed the benefit. On a reference to the European Court of Justice, by a Belgian Court, it was held that Article 39(2) EC Treaty and Article 3(1) Regulation 1408/71/EEC precluded national legislation in a member state that denied unemployment benefit to a national of another member state on the basis that at the date of the claim, the person concerned had not completed a specified period of employment in the member state of residence where there was no such requirement for nationals of that state. More info

R(Iqbal) v Secretary of State [2006] All ER (D) 140 (Nov) Sullivan J, High Court (Administrative Court) 10 November 2006. An asylum seeker had his claim for asylum refused in November 2001, lodged a notice of appeal and was waiting for an appeal. Later he received a letter from the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) stating he was no longer entitled to asylum support following a grant of asylum in October 2001. At a subsequent interview a NASS official told him he had been granted indefinite leave to remain. In the claim for judicial review of the failure to reply to a request for clarification of the Claimant’s status, the Secretary of State adduced evidence to show that there were two entries on a computer database that stated that the Claimant had been granted asylum and indefinite leave to remain but that this was an error. Sullivan J rejected the proposition that the events gave rise to a legitimate expectation that the Claimant had been granted asylum and indefinite leave to remain.

Reports

Seeking Asylum Alone: Unaccompanied and Separated Children and Refugee Protection in the U.K. - Jacqueline Bhabha and Nadine Finch (Human Rights at Harvard HRH/ Garden Court Chambers) The report documents a complex pattern of neglect, and suspicion towards unaccompanied and separated child asylum seekers. It illustrates the tension between child protection mandates and preoccupations about excessive immigration, a tension that drives and underlies attitudes and policies throughout the asylum determination process. If you would like a copy of the report please email naomis@gclaw.co.uk

Latest tweets from Garden Court Chambers

Follow us on Twitter

Tweets by gardencourtlaw

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

+ View more awards