Article 8 Private life claims: Positive value contribution to community must be very significant for a claim to succeed

Several issues arose in Thakrar (Cart JR, Art 8, Value to Community) [2018] UKUT 336 (IAC) (19 September 2018), one of them being whether the Claimant’s UK resident family as “ clear and overwhelming net contributors to the UK economy”, should be a relevant factor to be taken into account and carry weight in the Claimant’s Article 8 claim.

Continue reading

Liability to administrative removal, RED Notices, removal windows and injunctions: Your frequently asked questions answered

The following heads of consideration are raised in detail below:

 

  • Liability to non- EEA Administrative Removal

  • Notice of liability to Administrative Removal- RED Notices

  • Judicial Review

  • Notices of removal

  • Removal- the Notice Periods

  • Deferral of Notice Periods

  • Deferral of Removal

  • Injunctions

  • Rule 39 Indications from the European Court of Human Rights

  • Relevant Home Office policy Guidance

 

Continue reading

What you need to know about the varying levels of mandatory re-entry bans

People seeking to come to the UK may be refused entry because they are the subject of a one year, 2 year, 5 year or 10 year re-entry ban.

 

People may be the subject of a re-entry ban where they have previously breached the UK’s immigration laws by:

 

  • overstaying

  • breaching a condition attached to their leave

  • being an illegal entrant,

  • using deception in an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or remain (whether successful or not)

Continue reading

Straightjacket effect of MS(Pakistan): The problem of the First Tier Tribunal’s restricted approach to negative trafficking decisions

Would the Tribunal have found themselves in the straight jacket that the Court of Appeal has clothed it with had the Upper Tribunal not “exceeded it’s jurisdiction” or “ overreached itself” as concluded by the Court in The Secretary of State for the Home Department v MS (Pakistan) [2018] EWCA Civ 594?

 

The appeal in MS in the Court of Appeal raised an issue of principle as to the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal on a statutory appeal under section 84 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 Act to undertake an indirect judicial review of a negative trafficking decision made by the Secretary of State in that individual’s case. In that context, the appeal was noted to concern the scope and effect of the previous decision of the Court of Appeal in AS (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1469.

 

Continue reading

Political hot potato: Home Office refuses to disclose whether the Zimbabwean government will now issue ETD’s to non-consenting undocumented returnees

The subject of whether the Zimbabwean government has now made a U-turn from Mugabe’s previous position of refusing to accept unwilling Zimbabwean returnees without valid national passports, seems too hot to handle.

 

“A Response from the UK Government is long overdue, with stated reasons on 25 July 2018 being that, “ this is due to internal delays with our FOI process”.    It therefore remains to be seen, which if any, of the questions raised will be addressed by the Home Office in response”, was the conclusion to the recent blog post of 3 August 2018, The impact of Mnangagwa’s win upon UK based Zimbabwean asylum claimants

 

As I suspected, the Home office have refused to provide disclosure to any of the questions asked as regards whether there is now in practice an agreement between the UK and Zimbabwean government of enforcing returns of non- consenting undocumented Zimbabweans. The irksome problem for the UK government arising from their inability to enforce returns for such persons is summarized in a previous recent blog post: Is Mnangagwa’s New  Government paving the way for  UK mass removals of failed Zimbabwean Asylum Claimants ?

Continue reading