Immigration Detention & Bail Archives - Page 15 of 17 - ICS Legal Blog

Contact Us: + 44 0207 237 3388

Latest UK & International Legal News

Ved and another (appealable decisions; permission applications; Basnet) [2014] UKUT 00150 (IAC)

Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Ved and another (appealable decisions; permission applications; Basnet)[2014] UKUT 00150 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House On 19 February 2014 Determination promulgated: 27 March 2014 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ESHUN UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PETER LANE Between BHUPENDRA MAKANJI VED HARSHADA BHUPENDRA VED Appellants and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent Representation: For the appellants: Mr J. Chhotu, Counsel For the respondent: Mr N. Bramble, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer (1) A jurisdictional decision of the First-tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber, contained in a determination made after the appeal has passed the duty judge "screening" stage, is appealable to the Upper Tribunal: Practice Statement 3.4; Abiyat & others (Rights of appeal) [2011] UKUT 00314 (IAC). (2) Where the First-tier Tribunal has refused to entertain an application made to it for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, the Upper Tribunal has discretion under rule 7 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 to consider an application for permission made to that Tribunal, notwithstanding that the requirements of rule 21(2)(b) have not been met, in that the First-tier Tribunal has not refused (or not admitted) a permission application. It is, however,...

Home Secretary asks for review of how Home Office handles asylum claims on grounds of sexual orientation

Home Secretary Theresa May has asked the Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, John Vine, to review how the Home Office handles asylum claims on grounds of sexual orientation, BBC News reported on March 28th. The review comes in light of a February report in the Observer about how Home Office officials were under fire for using explicit and "shockingly degrading" lines of questioning when interviewing gay and lesbian asylum seekers. According to BBC News, Theresa May said some gay and lesbian asylum seekers were being asked "inappropriate" questions. The Guardian reported on Saturday that in a letter to the Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, May wrote: "We do need to establish that the risk of persecution is real, and this will often depend on whether the sexual orientation of the asylum seeker is as claimed. We seek to establish this at interview through questions about sexual orientation, not sexual behaviour." The letter continued: "It was disappointing therefore to discover that we may not have followed our guidance in at least one case, which was brought to the attention of the media recently and where inappropriate questions appear to have been asked. We are committed to treating all asylum claimants with respect and dignity...

CIFAS named for bank account controls role

he government has named CIFAS as the anti-fraud body likely to oversee proposed bank account controls set out in the Immigration Bill. The controls mean banks and building societies will be required to check all applications for new current accounts with a specified anti-fraud organisation or data-matching authority. Anyone who is in the UK illegally will not be allowed an account. The Home Office said in a statement of intent that CIFAS would be chosen as the specified anti-fraud organisation to hold data on known illegal migrants. The legislation continues the reform of the immigration system so that it is fair to British citizens and legitimate migrants. Those with outstanding asylum applications or appeals will not be affected, nor will those who have been granted leave to be here, including refugees. Only data relating to known illegal migrants will be passed on. CIFAS is a leading not-for-profit anti-fraud organisation with many banks and building societies as members. Over the last two years CIFAS and the Home Office have worked with UK financial service providers to avoid fraud amounting to £25million.

Gulshan (Article 8 – new Rules – correct approach) [2013] UKUT 640 (IAC)

The new approach to Article 8 cases is something being challenged by the Home Office. The Court of Appeal has underlined that it is the Strasbourg standards and principles which continue to govern the ultimate disposal of these cases. Confronted with significant concessions by the SSHD, the Court has construed the new Rules, which on their face appeared discordant with article 8, as in fact doing no more than requiring decision-makers to conduct the conventional proportionality exercise, paying regard to all of those considerations identified as relevant by the Strasbourg jurisprudence. In Gulshan, the First Tier Tribunal had allowed the appeal however the Upper Tribunal held that the Judge had erred. The background to the unfortunate Upper Tribunal judgment was that an appeal had been allowed in the First-tier Tribunal. A judge held that it was disproportionate to separate a British pensioner aged 67 from his wife of 34 years with nearly £30,000 of savings only on the basis of the husband commanding insufficient annual income to meet the £18,600 threshold. Cranston J pointedly comments that the 67 year old “does not work and has no income” and holds that the judge had erred in law: The determination in Gulshan also does violence to the Court of Appeal judgment...

Home Office: Evaluation of the new family returns process

A report commissioned by the Home Office evaluating the new family returns process has been published. You can read the 91-page report here. The report evaluates the conformity to process, welfare and safeguarding, preparation and barriers to return of families. The new family returns process was rolled out nationally on 1 March 2011 following a pilot in the North West of England and London between June 2010 and March 2011. The Home Office says it is a key component of the Government's aim to end the detention of children for immigration purposes. According to a press release, the evaluation report found that the new returns process provided a framework allowing families to take responsibility for their return. Lack of engagement meant that many did not take up this opportunity, and assisted and voluntary return rates did not increase (although they remained steady when the general trend was down). The Home Office commissioned report says the new family returns process had a positive impact on family welfare and safeguarding children. Some areas for possible improvement were identified. The evaluation also reported progress against the 20 child detention review commitments.

Supreme Court dismisses “adopted child” appeal but says rules should be amended

Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights today published a report on the Government's Immigration Bill. You can read the full report here or access the sections from here. The report raised significant concerns over the reduction in appeal rights, stating: "We are concerned that the Bill's significant limitation of appeal rights against immigration and asylum decisions is not compatible with the common law right of access to a court or tribunal in relation to unlawful immigration decisions, and the right to an effective remedy. Indeed, limiting rights of appeal to the extent that they are restricted in the Bill constitutes a serious threat to the practical ability to access the legal system to challenge unlawful immigration and asylum decisions, and to enforce the statutory duty to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children when exercising immigration and asylum functions." The section of the report dealing with appeal rights is available here. In a press release, the Committee stated: "The Committee believes that the First Tier Tribunal, not the Secretary of State, should decide whether it is within its jurisdiction to consider a new matter raised on an appeal. It therefore recommends that the Government amends the Bill to achieve...

New service standards for applications made in UK

Following feedback from customers and partners, UKVI service standards have changed for applications made within the UK since 1 January 2014. Processing times for straightforward applications are listed below. If your application is more complex and a decision cannot be made within that time, we will write to you to explain what happens next. Applications received before 1 January 2014 will remain subject to the standards in force at the time they were submitted. Processing times for applications made within the UK Customers applying to remain in the UK on a temporary basis as: a spouse, workers, Tier 1 General and entrepreneurs, students, and organisations seeking to sponsor a worker 8 weeks (10 days priority postal and same day premium) Employers applying in the UK to update and maintain their licence details 18 weeks Customers applying in the UK to remain permanently (or naturalise as British) and applicants from Turkey and Croatia to live, study or work 6 months

Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration concerned by poor decision making at Dhaka and Warsaw visa sections

EIN John Vine, Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, today released investigation reports on the Home Office's Dhaka and Warsaw visa sections. You can read the Dhaka report here and the Warsaw report here. The Chief Inspector found the customer service at both visa sections was good, but the quality of decision making was poor. A press release quoted him as saying: "I was pleased to find that customer service targets were being met across most of the categories of visa applications we inspected at both visa sections, and there was a genuine commitment to improving customer service standards." "However, the quality of decision-making was poor in all the visa categories I inspected at both Dhaka and Warsaw. It is vitally important, if the visa application process is to be fair and transparent, that the Home Office corrects these serious failings in its decision making. Given the poor level of decision quality the Home Office should also review the target for Other Visitor applications in Warsaw to bring decision quality and ultimately customer service to an acceptable standard." The press release also noted that the Chief Inspector found in Dhaka: • customer service targets were being met in the majority of the Family Visitor,...

Court of Justice of the European Union

The Court of Justice of the European Union has today released its judgment in Bundesrepublik Deutschland v Kaveh Puid, Case C-4/11. Where a Member State may not transfer an asylum seeker to the State competent to examine his application because of a risk of infringement of his fundamental rights in the latter, the Member State is required to identify another Member State as responsible for the examination Conversely, it is not, in principle, required itself to examine the application The 'Dublin II' Regulation [1] sets out the criteria for determining the Member State competent to examine an application for asylum lodged in the EU – a single Member State being, in principle, competent. Where an asylum seeker has lodged his application in a Member State which is not the one the Regulation indicates is competent, the Regulation provides for a procedure for the transfer of the asylum seeker to the competent Member State. However, in such a situation, the Member State to which the application was made may decide not to transfer the applicant to the competent State and itself to examine the application. Mr Puid, an Iranian national, arrived in Germany irregularly by transiting through Greece. His application for asylum lodged...

Changes to document requirements

From 28 October 2013 if you are applying by post for extension of stay, indefinite leave to remain or British citizenship on the following forms, you no longer need to provide an original passport from the British or settled person supporting your application - a photocopy of their passport or travel document can be provided instead. Applying for extension of stay or indefinite leave to remain Forms FLR(M), SET(M) and SET(F) fiancé(e) of a British citizen or settled person; civil partner or proposed civil partner of a British citizen or settled person; spouse of a British citizen or settled person; unmarried partner of a British citizen or settled person; same sex partner of a British citizen or settled person; or child or other dependant relative of a British citizen or settled person. Applying for British citizenship Forms AN and MN1 spouse of a British citizen; civil partner of a British citizen; child of a British citizen parent. The photocopy must include all pages of the passport, including any blank pages, and we will verify it with other government departments in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998. We may request the original document at any time during the application process,...