Brexit brainstorming: immigration analysis – New Law Journal
‘How will UK-based EU citizens fare in the event of a full Brexit? Kate Beaumont gets an expert opinion from Tim Eicke QC.’
New Law Journal, 6th May 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘How will UK-based EU citizens fare in the event of a full Brexit? Kate Beaumont gets an expert opinion from Tim Eicke QC.’
New Law Journal, 6th May 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Schindler and MacLennan v. Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2016] EWHC 957, Divisional Court 28 April 2016. An interesting, albeit unsuccessful, challenge to the rule which prohibits expatriates who were last registered to vote in the UK more than 15 years ago from voting in the forthcoming referendum on EU membership.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 28th April 2016
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The ringleader of a child sex grooming gang has appealed against deportation from Britain on human rights grounds.’
BBC News, 16 February 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Secretary of State for the Home Department had no discretion to refuse citizenship by naturalisation under section 6(1) of the British Nationality Act 1981 in order to deter potential extremists from their activities through knowing that family members would not be naturalised in consequence.’
WLR Daily, 3rd December 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In another reminder that British citizenship can be refused on the basis of past dishonest conduct we have the case of R (on the application of Rushiti & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 3931 (Admin). This one dates back a few months but I’m afraid I only just found it in my drafts folder. It involves two linked cases, both of which are further examples of Albanians entering the UK and pretending to be Kosovar, eventually obtaining immigration status then applying for British citizenship.’
Free Movement, 18th January 2016
Source: www.freemovement.org.uk
‘The Secretary of State for the Home Department refused the citizenship applications of the wife and two minor children of an Islamist extremist on good character grounds. The refusal was justified by the Home Office as punishment by proxy which would have the effect of deterring other extremists. The High Court has declared that unlawful in the case of MM & GY & TY v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 3513 (Admin).’
Free Movement, 8th December 2015
Source: www.freemovement.org.uk
‘Hani al-Sibai has been on a terror sanctions list since 2005 and resisted deportation to his native Egypt for almost 20 years – but the High Court has ruled his family should be given UK citizenship.’
Daily Telegraph, 5th December 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The wife and children of an Islamist extremist linked to al-Qaeda have won a legal battle against the Home Secretary’s refusal to grant them UK citizenship.’
BBC News, 3rd December 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In a case of impersonation where a person had fraudulently made false representations about his own identity and that fraud was material to the grant of naturalisation, the grant of nationality was a nullity.’
WLR Daily, 26th November 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The case is R (Bondada) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 2661 (Admin), a challenge to a refusal by British officials to recognise the British citizenship of a lady who was a survivor of domestic violence looking to rebuild her life.’
Free Movement, 16th October 2015
Source: www.freemovement.org.uk
‘The government tried to deny a passport to the daughter of a British citizen in conduct described as “grotesque” by a high court judge.’
The Guardian, 15th October 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The removal of citizenship has been used as a penalty for disloyalty only rarely in Britain. A handful of spies with dual nationality were denaturalised during the Cold War, but the last case in the 20th century was in 1973. Change came slowly even after 9/11: only five people were stripped of British citizenship by Labour home secretaries, and the emblematic bogeyman of the era, the hook-handed Abu Hamza, repeatedly dodged moves to annul the Britishness he had gained through marriage. He didn’t manage to elude extradition to the United States, where he has now been jailed for life, but for what it’s worth, he remains notionally a British subject.’
London Review of Books, 18th June 2015
Source: www.lrb.co.uk
‘Every few months, a new report announces the breakdown of the British immigration system. In January, the Committee of Public Accounts issued a searing review of the Home Office’s migration policy. Three months earlier, the National Audit Office released a near-identical critique. Each publication invokes a now-familiar folk devil – the ‘foreign criminal’ – and demands better coordination between immigration enforcers and prison managers. Four times a year, we are told that governments that do not deport ‘foreign offenders’ are fundamentally unfit.’
OUP Blog, 26th May 2015
Source: http://blog.oup.com
Pham (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2015] UKSC 19 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 25th March 2015
‘Hannah Lynes brings us the latest edition of the Human Rights Round-up.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 7th April 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The question whether a person was not considered as a national by a state under the operation of its law, with the effect that he would be stateless if deprived of British citizenship, was not necessarily to be decided solely by reference to the text of the nationality legislation of the state in question, and reference might also be made to the practice of the government, even if not subject to effective challenge in the courts.’
WLR Daily, 25th March 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘On first glance, this was not a judgment about human rights. It concerned the definition of statelessness under article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, and raised issues of competence and jurisdiction in relation to EU citizenship. Its specific interest for human rights lawyers lies primarily in the observations about the principle of proportionality; and in where the case, which most certainly does raise human rights issues, is likely to go next.
UK Human Rights Blog, 31st March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
FAS v Bradford Metropolitan District Council and another [2015] EWHC 622 (Fam); [2015] WLR (D) 128
‘It remained the case that the court would rarely make an adoption order when it would confer no benefits upon the child during its childhood but gave it a right of abode for the rest of its life. The proposition to that effect in In re B (A Minor) (Adoption Order: Nationality) [1999] 2 AC 136, 141–142, decided in the context of section 6 of the Adoption Act 1976 and the need to promote and safeguard the welfare of the child “throughout his childhood”, still applied despite the change in the welfare test effected by the Adoption and Children Act 2002, which now provided that the paramount (as opposed to the first) consideration was the child’s welfare “throughout his life”. Thus, where the court was in effect being asked to use adoption to confer citizenship prospectively upon an adult the courts were reluctant to trespass upon the area of the Home Secretary’s authority entrusted to him by Parliament.’
WLR Daily, 13th March 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘There must be times when Court of Appeal judges think that they have bit parts in an ongoing drama – they have a walk on role. And that must be how the Court felt in Sanneh v SSWP and others [2015] EWCA Civ 49, which concerns the eligibility rules for Zambrano carers of a raft of social assistance benefits. Leading QCs and junior barristers appeared on all sides in a right ding dong that is bound to end up at the Supreme Court, which almost certainly will refer the issues to the CJEU. It also provides a glimpse of how the recent, potentially contradictory, judgments of the CJEU in Brey and Dano are, or might be, treated (although it looks like the UKSC will have the next bite of those rather earlier, in the Mirga and Samin appeals in March) and the question of the ambit of “social assistance”, which in itself is not uninteresting, is also raised, but parked by the CA, in these appeals ([84] – note: this is an important point for the future).’
NearlyLegal, 12th February 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Landlords are preparing to turn away tenants just because they have a foreign accent, as a consequence of new rules making it an offence to let rooms to illegal migrants.’
Full story
The Independent, 15th February 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk