- Behind the Hashtag: Human Rights and Sexual Violence Against Women
- What Does Digital Life Mean For Human Rights?
- Keir Starmer Talks Human Rights, Brexit, and Everything In-Between
- Big Questions: Olympian Rebecca Howard on Why Equestrian is the Most Equal Sport
- Can Social Media Damage Your Right to a Fair Trial?
Human rights, long residence and the integration test in the Court of Appeal
AS v SSHD  EWCA 1284 Practitioners commonly rely on the “integration test” in the Immigration Rules to resist an individual’s removal on human rights grounds. The current rules can in some circumstances require a consideration of whether there would be “very significant obstacles” to an individual’s re-integration in that country if they were to be removed or deported. But what characteristics or circumstances can be considered when assessing these obstacles? The Court of Appeal in AS has provided some useful guidance. For a full exploration of the long residence rules and the 10 and 20 year rules in particular see our earlier post: The case of Stoly Jankovic: what are...14th September 2017
UPDATED: Home Office makes changes to Appendix FM Minimum Income Rule following MM case
On 20 July 2017 the Home Office published changes to the Immigration Rules intended to give effect to findings made by the Supreme Court in MM (Lebanon) & Others v the Secretary for the Home Department  UKSC 10 on the Minimum Income Requirement. The new rules come into effect on 10 August 2017, coinciding with the publication of new Home Office guidance explaining how the changes should be applied. Headline changes The main changes to the Minimum Income Requirement policy are as follows: Other sources of income will be considered to meet the Minimum Income Rule in certain circumstances Where other sources of income are relied upon the applicant,...10th August 2017
The case of Stoly Jankovic: what are the 10 and 20 year rules on long residence?
The case of Stoly Jankovic recently attracted a lot of press attention and a great deal of sympathy. He had apparently been living and working in the UK since 1991, for a period of 26 years. How can it be right that he be detained for removal after all that time? Well, the rules on acquiring lawful status after long residence are very tightly drawn and it sounds as if he has fallen foul of them. I have been meaning to write a post on the long residence rules for as long as I can remember, and this seems like a good opportunity. How did Mr Jankovic find himself in this predicament?...24th May 2017
Strasbourg rules on state obligations towards trafficked persons
Chowdury and Others v Greece (Application number 21884/15 – the judgment is only available in French. An English-language press summary is available.) The European Court of Human Rights has found that strawberry-pickers in Greece were subjected to forced labour. The Court found that the authorities failed to prevent forced labour and protect the migrant workers. The case raises novel points about the scope of the right not to be subjected to forced labour, and the state’s obligations to investigate potential instances of forced labour and trafficking. The facts The applicants in this case are 42 Bangladeshi men who worked on a strawberry farm in Nea Manolada, Greece from 2012-2013. They...2nd May 2017
Court of Appeal decides Supreme Court ruling in Hesham Ali is already redundant
Well, that did not take long. The Court of Appeal has in the case of NE-A (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 239 decided that the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Hesham Ali  UKSC 60 is confined to cases in which the Immigration Rules are applied and does not apply to cases decided under the statutory human rights considerations introduced by the Immigration Act 2014. As background, in 2012 the Government introduced new Immigration Rules which in effect set a series of strict quasi-statutory tests to be applied in immigration cases in which human rights were pleaded. The intended effect was to reduce the...18th April 2017
Court of Appeal reaffirms position on adult dependent relatives
In Butt v SSHD  EWCA Civ 184 the Court of Appeal considers the weight to be given to the relationship between parents and their adult dependent children in the Article 8 balancing exercise. It is notable – and this was the principle reason it managed to reach the Court of Appeal – because of the original decision of the First-Tier Tribunal (FTT) to make separate findings in relation to parents and those adult dependent children: allowing the appeals of the latter, while rejecting the former. The facts The Butt family arrived in the UK on 7 July 2004. They had been granted visit visas for a 6 month stay but did...30th March 2017