UK Immigration & Nationality Lawyers

Private life of PBS migrants, Nasim v SSHD

Human Rights


Private life of PBS migrants, Nasim v SSHD

Nasim v SSHD (Article 8) [2014] UKUT 00025 is an appeal by a group of Tier 4 migrants whose applications for Post-Study Work visa were refused for the reason that their degree certificates only became available after the route was formally closed in April 2012. In this context, the Upper Tribunal considered arguments based on the appellants’ right to private life established in the UK and the so called “near-miss” principle. In other words the tribunal had to decide whether the appellants could succeed on the ground that failure to comply with the requirements of the rules was marginal, non-essential, and outside the Appellants’ control. The


Residence rights of the parents of an EEA national child

Parents of EEA national children have derivative right of residence in the UK - they need to demonstrate self-sufficiency of the whole family before their right to live and work is confirmed and this is likely to create an insurmountable obstacle for those who do not have an independent right of residence and employment at the time of the application.


Claiming asylum on the basis of homosexuality – opinion of Advocate General to CJEU

Advocate General to CJEU, Eleanor Sharpston, has delivered her opinion in the joined cases related to asylum claims by three homosexual men. According to the AG homosexual men can form a particular social group for the purposes of Qualification Directive, yet criminalisation of homosexuality is insufficient to demonstrate persecution. The courts would need to address the likely practical steps to be taken by the respective governments and the severity and frequency of measures applied. In the joined cases C-199/12, C-200/12 and C-201/12, X,Y,Z v Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel, the appellants are three homosexual men from Sierra Leone, Uganda and Senegal. Homosexual acts


Unaccompanied children win against the Secretary of State before CJEU

In MA, BT and DA v SSHD, case C‑648/11, CJEU considered the duty of the Member States in relation to minor children who made an asylum claim in more than one country and found that it is the country of the last claim that is responsible for the decision making in the light of its duty to ensure protection and welfare of the children. The appellants in this consolidated appeal were unaccompanied minors, two of them from Eritrea and one from Iraq, who prior to arrival in the UK, had made an application for asylum in another Member State. An established


Tier 2 visa update: in-country switching from Tier 2 general to PBS dependant is not impossible says High Court

The immigration rules do not permit switching from Tier 2 General route into PBS dependant category – this restriction has been subject of judicial review in the case of Shuai Zhang where the High Court found the restriction incompatible with the claimant’s right to private and family life. In this case the claimant was a Tier 2 migrant who had been made redundant in her sponsored employment and was unable to find an alternative Tier 2 sponsor to remain in this category.  Her husband was in the UK as a Tier 1 Post Study Work visa holder and it was logical for


Indefinite leave to remain may be dictated by the duty to safeguard welfare of children

Best interests of the child must be a primary consideration for immigration authorities. High Court declares that this duty is overlooked in the policy on Discretionary Leave to remain as of October 2009 which requires two spells of limited leave for three years before indefinite leave to remain becomes a viable option. The case of SM and others v SSHD [2013] EWHC 1144 (Admin) was a judicial review of the policy on discretionary leave as of 2009 in relation to the children who had applied for leave to remain outside the immigration rules and were granted limited leave to remain


Family visitors will lose full right of appeal from 25 June 2013

The UKBA has announced that from 25 June 2013 full right of appeal will be abolished for applicants for a family visitor’s visa. Applications for this type of visa made before 25 June will bear full right of appeal independently of the date of the decision. Those who applied on or after 25 June 2013 will only be able to challenge refusal on the limited grounds of discrimination or the breach of Human Rights. In July 2012 the government narrowed the definition of “family visitor” removing from the definition uncles, aunts, nieces and first cousins. As general visitors these family members could no


Full right of appeal for family visitors to be scrapped by Crime and Courts Bill

The government intends to discard full right of appeal for family visitors by January 2014.  In much shorter term, from July 2012, the right of appeal will only be available to the core family members – parents, grand parents, spouse and children – of persons settled in the UK, or of those granted refugee status or humanitarian aid. This latter change will be introduced by secondary legislation which will amend the definition of “family members” in the context of “family visitors” so as to exclude cousins, uncles, nieces and nephews. It will also amend the definition of “sponsors” so as

2020 Kadmos Consultants / Sitemap / Privacy / Disclaimer / Terms Of Use

Copyright Kadmos Consultants

Speak to a UK Immigration Lawyer! Call +44 (0) 208 930 9503 or send us a message
Complete the form and one of our UK immigration lawyers will be in touch.