I_fought_the_law

Leveson adopts Sir John Thomas position in Butt Spanking For Immigration Solicitors

Colin Yeo —  — Leave a comment

Sir Brian Leveson has made clear in the case of R (On the Application Of Butt) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 264 (Admin) that he intends to follow his predecessor as President of the Queens Bench Division, Sir John Thomas, in chastising immigration solicitors perceived to have breached their duty to the court in their conduct of urgent removal injunction applications:

It should not be thought that the approach which the then President initiated has in any sense fallen into desuetude following his appointment as Chief Justice. Continue Reading…

In Administrative Court, Judicial review, Procedure
 
barristers on strike outside court

What happened to the radical lawyers?

Colin Yeo —  — 8 Comments

What is a radical lawyer? What I mean by it are those lawyers whose actions and attitudes were largely motivated by a political ideology – socialism and further left; or at least angry lawyers dedicated to fundamental changes to the law, its institutions and the legal system. They were fearless in putting their often unpopular views across, and it was their badge of honour to be criticised intemperately by others in the legal system. I frequently used to hear vile, unprintable, almost hysterical remarks made about leftie lawyers; I have seen judges in court barely able to speak civilly to the likes of Michael Mansfield, such was their hatred of him and the threat they thought he represented to the good order of the law. It often took a lot of courage for radical lawyers to speak up on behalf of their clients, not least because their own professional bodies were equally suspicious of them, ready to pounce on and punish any minor lapse of professional conduct… Continue Reading…

In General interest, Work
 

Syrian asylum seekers rejected, detained and removed in 2013

A Parliamentary written answer yesterday revealed that of the Syrians that managed to get to the UK to claim asylum in 2013, 24 were forcibly removed and a further 20 remain in immigration detention today. That seems to me truly shocking. It certainly gives lie to the UK Government’s hollow claim to a humanitarian approach to Syrians affected by the crisis. Who or what are the people at the Home Office that make these decisions?

Via @AVIDdetention.

  8 Comments

Shahzad (Art 8: legitimate aim) Pakistan [2014] UKUT 85 (IAC)

Like a bad itch that it can’t help but scratch, the tribunal returns again to the subject of Article 8 and ‘the proper approach’. Regretfully the distasteful, injudicious and simply impolite phrase “a run of the mill case” is again deployed, albeit this time in the context of a student rather than a pensioner and his wife. The Home Office appeal succeeds against an allowed First-tier Tribunal determination. Headnote as follows: Continue Reading…

 Posted by Colin Yeo in Article 8, Cases, Human rights, Tribunal
  1 Comment
20140304-085755.jpg

Good character and applications for citizenship

Raza Halim —  — 1 Comment

In Hiri v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 254 (Admin) the Administrative Court found for the Claimant in an application for Judicial Review of the Secretary of State’s decision to refuse naturalisation on grounds of ‘good character’. The judgment provides useful judicial comment as to how the Secretary of State must approach assessments of an applicant’s character by reference to her policy and otherwise. The Secretary of State’s policy on ‘good character’ has undergone several iterations since the justiciable decision in this case; however, the utility of Mrs Justice Lang’s remarks reach beyond the relevant policy in Hiri and bears application to the Secretary of State’s broader approach to these cases. Continue Reading…

In Administrative Court, Cases, Nationality
 
little-miss-late

New judgment on delays by Home Office in judicial review cases

James Packer —  — 2 Comments

The Upper Tribunal has in a new judgment now set out how it will deal with the vast majority of judicial reviews in which the Home Office fail to provide a timely Acknowledgment of Service. The ruling almost entirely follows the form anticipated in our blog post following the hearing.

The most surprising feature of the final form of the judgment is that, despite a pretty clear indication at the hearing that these ‘special arrangements’ would have a clear end date following which the ordinary rules would apply, upon reflection this has been watered down to keeping the arrangements ‘under regular review’. Despite the commitments made in Singh, and further claims before the hearing to be getting to grips with the backlog and that further improvement would soon follow, the Tribunal treated the promises of progress with some scepticism, and the Home Office was constrained to accept that the reality is that delays will continue for many months. Continue Reading…

In Cases, Guest post, Judicial review, Procedure, Tribunal
 

Expediting an EU residence card application

This is just one of the useful snippets from the ILPA policies and concessions gaining course I co-presented with Alison Stanley and Meghan Vozila last week. They in fact did most of the work!

It is possible to request expedition of an EU residence card application where it has been outstanding for over three months. See the European Casework Instructions at Chapter 10 for details. There are also other potential justifications for speeding things up, including being unable to make journeys necessary for compassionate or business reasons on existing documents, being elderly (i.e. 65 or over) and showing that an EEA document is needed for a particular job.

  10 Comments

Me: Any idea how long the first case on the list might take?

Usher: Shouldn’t be long, there’s no lawyer for that one.

 Posted by Colin Yeo in Appeals
  7 Comments