Ripon Akther

Win For Children With Discretionary Leave

The Administrative Court declared that a policy which does not give effect to section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 is not lawful.  The excellent Amanda Weston of Tooks Chambers for the Claimants and Joanne Rothwell of No 5 CHambers for the intervener, Coram Children’s Legal Centre (CCLC), argued that where there had been findings that the removal of a child would breach his or her human rights, the SSHD’s failure to consider granting Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), when requested to do so, and to, instead, grant Discretionary Leave (DL) as a matter of course is wrong. Holman J in SM & Ors v Secretary of…

18th June 2013 By Ripon Akther

Time to stop lawyer bashing and look at where the real fault lies….

Carrying on from FM’s open season article last week, it is clear that immigration lawyers are getting a hard time of it at the moment: first it was judge bashing and now the lawyers are in the firing line. The pernicious pastime of naming and shaming the legal profession needs to stop. Fearlessness is needed for us to do our jobs properly, particularly those of us representing  or judging vulnerable migrants, a group even lower in the public’s esteem than politicians. That is made just a little bit harder where there is a risk of judgment in the kangaroo court of public opinion. Under attack themselves, we have seen the…

28th November 2012 By Ripon Akther

Legacy case WINS!

Following on from Hakemi, the High Court has again scrutinised the leave to remain under the “Legacy” cases, and found the SSHD’s adherence to the policy wanting. In a welcome move last Friday Mr Stephen Morris QC, sitting as Deputy High Court Judge, quashed as unlawful the decision to refuse the Claimant leave to remain without having full regard to the provisions in Chapter 53. Mohammed v SSHD [2012] EWHC 3091 (Admin), handed down on Friday 2 November 2012, is the latest decision in which the court found the decision to refuse leave under Paragraph 395 unlawful: “In taking the decision in the 7 February 2011 letter, the Defendant (through…

6th November 2012 By Ripon Akther

New Legacy judgment

In a spate of very significant judgments last week, the long awaited legacy case has finally come out: Hakemi v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 1967 (Admin). Nicola Braganza was led by Hugh Southey QC, both of Tooks Chambers. As many suspected we are still in the dark about a lot of the issues surrounding the Legacy, only today likened by the Home Affairs Select Committee to the infamous Bermuda Triangle. Many enter, few emerge… Nevertheless the judgment does provide us with some guidance as to the specific criteria on which applicants were being either granted or refused leave. For example, it would seem caseworkers were…

23rd July 2012 By Ripon Akther

What is the “Legacy?”

Is it a bird, is it a plane or…is it in fact a policy?  Now the UKBA would vigorously deny this, they would deny that there is any kind of amnesty at all. However, the evidence would point to the contrary. Essentially prior to July 2011 if you had claimed asylum before the 5th March 2007 and your case was regarded as “unresolved” ie there is still some action pending; you would get a response on your case. A grant of Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) would usually follow, or you would be removed. The majority of such decision making usually led to a grant of ILR. Now one may…

19th June 2012 By Ripon Akther