Category Archives: Children
7 Year Children Rule: Court of Appeal Clarifies the Correct Approach to the Reasonableness Test
It has taken all of 3years and 7months for there to be clarification from the higher Courts as regards the correct approach to the reasonableness test in Paragraph 276ADE(1)(iv) of the Immigration Rules. The Court of Appeal’s judgment on the issue in MA (Pakistan) & Ors, R (on the application of) v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor [2016] EWCA Civ 705, makes very interesting reading.
Continue reading
Court of Appeal’s Further Guidance On The Correct Approach To Deportation Appeals
In addition to noting that the Court of Appeal has provided yet further guidance in relation to deportation appeals in NA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2016] EWCA Civ 662, legal practitioners need to brace themselves for yet further wordplay in relation to newly introduced deportation lingo. We are now familiar with and have grown fairly comfortable with regularly used terms such as, “ a free standing Article 8 analysis” and “ through the lens of the immigration rules”. The Court of Appeal in NA (Pakistan) has gone further; as noted at paragraph 14 of their judgement, when considering the Immigration Rules on deportation, foreign criminals are divided into two categories: those with sentences of between one and four years’ imprisonment and those sentenced to four years or more. The Court of Appeal then decided for the sake of “simplicity”, that the first category shall be referred to as ‘medium offenders’ and the second category as ‘serious offenders’.
Continue reading
Addressing the Problems Faced by Adult Dependant Children and Siblings
Adult dependant children or siblings sometimes face considerable problems when seeking to join or remain with a sponsoring parent or sibling residing in the UK. Reliance can be placed upon several provisions, however it is undeniable that some routes are much more difficult to satisfy than others.
Finally Making Sense Of The 7year Rule In Relation to Children: But Is the Upper Tribunal’s Decision In line With EV (Philippines)?
The Upper Tribunal in their recent decision of PD and Others (Article 8 – conjoined family claims) Sri Lanka [2016] UKUT 108 (IAC) correctly refused to accede to the approach, that in considering the applicability of the 7Year Rule, the claim of a “qualifying child” concerning a family unit, should be severed from that of the parents who did not meet the requirements of the Immigration Rules. Not only did the Upper Tribunal refuse to do so but also in allowing the appeal, distinguished in relevant parts, the Court of Appeal decision of EV (Philippines) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 874.
Among other considerations and factors, the Upper Tribunal in PD and Others noted in relation to the relevant qualifying child that, “Critical milestones in both his personal and educational development have been passed and are now looming”; that he was “ an intellectually gifted young man who has made excellent academic progress” and also observed that the critical stage of his personal and educational development had been reached.
FGM and Trafficking Case : Rare Substantive Cart Judicial Review Claim Succeeds in the Adminstrative Court
G & H, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 239 was acknowledged by the Administrative Court to be “ one of those rare cases in which the court has given permission to proceed in an application for judicial review of an Upper Tribunal FTT permission refusal”. As was noted by the Court at paragraph 5 of their judgement, one of the features of the case was that the Secretary of State advanced contentions which, even though the claimant had satisfied the test identified in Cart and other procedural requirements in CPR 54.7A, would require the claimant to surmount a new substantive hurdle limiting the grounds upon which the High Court can grant judicial review.