It Is for The Party Asserting Bias Against an Immigration Judge To Make Good That Allegation

It appears that there is currently no Tribunal Rule  nor other Practice Direction issued in the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)  dealing with  conduct or  alleged bias on the part of an Immigration Judge.  The  Court  of Appeal in Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 4,  although finding in that particular case that the  allegation  of  bias against an Immigration Judge had not been made out, offered in a postscript, some suggestions stated to be neither prescriptive nor exhaustive on how to address the issues. The Court of Appeal’s view was that  if  this kind of appeal  is to become more prevalent in this context then it would be much better for the Chamber Presidents, with their specialist expertise and their knowledge of the practicalities and in conjunction with the Senior President of Tribunals as appropriate, to decide whether or not to formulate any Practice Direction or Practice Statement or Guidance Note which may be considered necessary or desirable.

In Singh,  an appeal  reached the Court of Appeal with the argument being focused on an assertion of apparent bias. It was  said that the First-tier Tribunal Judge made remarks at the outset of the appeal hearing before him which indicated that he had a closed mind and/or had prejudged the appeal. The argument was  that the hearing was in consequence unfair.

Continue reading

The Home Office and National Passports: Resolving Validity, Expedition, Retention and Return Issues

A person may need to have a current, original  passport  to enable  submission of a valid  Home Office  application. There are however other reasons why such a document may be required including:

  • Needing a valid passport for identity purposes, for example in order to register to marry or in order to undertake a relevant English test;
  • needing to travel urgently.

The home office may have retained the passport following a refusal decision- a question might  then arise  as regards  under  what power the home office can do so. Where the home office have retained  a passport and are not willing to return the original document, are they able to send a certified copy of the document instead?

Continue reading

Claimant’s duty of candour in judicial review proceedings and evidence proving long residence: What Mr Khan did wrong

The recently reported case of Khan, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 416, raises the following  issues in summary:

  • Claimant’s duty of candour in judicial review proceedings;
  • Whether only  documents from “official” sources are acceptable in proving continuous long residence.

In essence, what Mr Khan  did wrong  in seeking to assert that  he  was entitled  to  indefinite  leave to remain under the  previous 14year long residence rule was that he :

  • Put forward two different factual versions of his residence between 1998 and 2001; and
  • In breach of his duty of candour in judicial review proceedings, failed to provide a witness statement explaining the discrepancy between a previous work permit application and subsequent leave to remain application in relation to the said period of residence.

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.

Continue reading

A Proposed Fleecing of Immigrants in the First Tier and Upper Tribunal: The Consultation On New Fees

Yet again another increase of fees for Home office applications and Tribunal  fees. Read more on my overall view on the proposed higher fees and tactics to buy yourself time to pay.

Continue reading

The Practical Effect of Section 3C Leave And Positively Utilising Home Office Policy Guidance to Maximum Effect

An applicant may inadvertently fail to submit the correct  specified application form and thereby also provide the wrong fee payment or none at all. An applicant may also fail for one reason or the other to have their biometrics taken within the required time limit. These errors and failures may   ultimately result in invalidation of a timely submitted leave application and therefore   rejection with  the result that such an applicant becomes an overstayer.  An invalid application does not extend leave under section 3C of the  1971 Act (as per Iqbal & Ors, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 838, mentioned below).  Section 3C does not extend leave where the application is made after the applicant’s current leave has expired.

Continue reading