UK BORDER AGENCY – GOVERNMENT PLANS REVIEWS OF IMMIGRATION SYSTEM
On 6thSeptember 2010 the Immigration Minister Damian Green announced government plans for reviews of the immigration system. The reviews will look into how long term net migration can be reduced by identifying new controls to separate categories of immigration. Click here for more
R (on the application of ZO (Somalia) and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  UKSC 36: Article 2 of the Council Directive 2003/9/EC laying down the minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (“the Reception Directive”) defines an “application for asylum” as “an application made by a third-country national or a stateless person which can be understood as a request for international protection from a Member State, under the Geneva Convention [Relating to the Status of Refugees]”.
Article 11 of the Reception Directive also states that “Member States shall determine a period of time, starting from the date on which an application for asylum was lodged, during which an applicant shall not have access to the labour market”.
This period of time is a year in the United Kingdom.
In the present case the Supreme Court confirmed that it was not only an initial application for asylum which entitled an asylum seeker to work if he or she had been waiting for that application to be determined for more than a year. It also applied to subsequent fresh applications, which had been made by the same applicant.
OT (Ankara agreement: students, businessmen, workers) Turkey  UKUT 328(IAC): The Upper Tribunal held that HC 510 (the Immigration Rules in force in 1973 – which operate as a ‘standstill clause’ for the purposes of the Ankara Agreement) did not permit a person who was admitted as a student to remain or apply for leave to remain as a businessman.
CDS (PBS “available” Article 8 ) Brazil  UKUT 305 (IAC): The Upper Tribunal found that the under Points Based System, funds are “available” to an applicant for leave at the time of an application and/or decision if they belong to a third party but that 3rdparty is shown to be willing to deploy them to support the applicant as claimed for the purposes of the application.