‘In a judgment with potentially wide implications for damages claims for breaches of fundamental human rights, the Court of Appeal in ASY & Others v Home Office [2024] EWCA Civ 373 has held that there is a right to damages for imminent breaches of article 3 of the ECHR (the absolute prohibition on torture and inhuman or degrading treatment).’
3PB, 18th April 2024
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘There are fears that more people will be separated by the introduction of a minimum salary level for those wanting UK family visas.’
BBC News, 24th April 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Council of Europe’s human rights watchdog has condemned Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda scheme, saying it raises “major issues about the human rights of asylum seekers and the rule of law”.’
The Guardian, 23rd April 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal of Mrs Akhtar who had been resident in the UK for 39 years (since 1985). Elisabeth Laing, Phillips and Males LJJ held that the Upper Tribunal had not failed to consider all the relevant circumstances when reaching its decision under section 117C(6) of Part 5A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and they dismissed Mrs Akhtar’s appeal. Judges Mandalia and Hanson had not erroneously concluded that a foreign criminal had failed to meet the statutory exceptions in section 117C(6) when deciding her rights under article 8 of the ECHR did not outweigh the public interest in her deportation. Mrs Akhtar and her husband (“H”) were both convicted criminal offences on 21 April 2016 and they were duly sentenced, respectively, to a total of 4 years and three months’ imprisonment and to 14 years’ imprisonment (reduced to 11 on appeal) for their roles in a substantial and long-running mortgage fraud. Mrs Akhtar was convicted of the offences of cheating the public revenue between 1 January 2004 and 26 September 2012, entering into an arrangement to facilitate the acquisition, retention, use or control of criminal property and two counts of conspiracy to obtain a money transfer by deception. She was sentenced, respectively, to 30 months’ imprisonment, 30 months’ imprisonment, concurrent and also 21 months’ imprisonment, consecutive, and 21 months’ imprisonment, concurrent. Mrs Akhtar, who entered the UK as a fiancée in 1985, complained that the UT did not take her long residence into account in considering section 117C(6).’
EIN Blog, 22nd April 2024
Source: www.ein.org.uk
‘Rishi Sunak’s plan to fly people seeking asylum to Rwanda this spring appears to have been put back to the summer after House of Lords insisted on changes to the scheme.’
The Guardian, 19th April 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Ukrainian refugees fleeing the horrors of war to find sanctuary in British homes were sent to live with suspected gangsters under the government’s flagship Homes for Ukraine scheme, The Independent can reveal.’
The Independent, 14th April 2024
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘On 4 December 2023 the Home Secretary, James Cleverly, announced future changes to visa rules in what he described as a “five-point plan” to reduce immigration. The Home Office released more information on 21 December, including some adjustments to what had initially been announced.’
House of Commons Library, 11th April 2024
Source: commonslibrary.parliament.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has held that a child born to a French national mother who was ordinarily resident in the UK while she was exercising her right of free movement as a worker had not automatically acquired British citizenship at birth under section 1(1)(b) of the British Nationality Act 1981 as the child of someone “settled” in the UK. In so concluding, the Court of Appeal held that the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2000 were “immigration laws” which subjected the mother to a restriction on her entitlement to remain in the UK and meant that she had not been “settled” for the purposes of section 1(1)(b) at the time of the child’s birth. At first instance Eyre J had dismissed Mr Roehrig’s claim for judicial review of the decision made by the SSHD refusing his application for a British passport. The issue in this appeal, as it was before the single judge, was whether Mr Roehrig automatically acquired British citizenship at birth under section 1(1)(b) of the British Nationality Act 1981. Notably, section 1(1)(b) of the 1981 Act provides that “A person born in the United Kingdom after commencement shall be a British citizen if at the time of the birth his father or mother is …(b) settled in the United Kingdom.” The SSHD refused the application stating: “As you were not able to provide documentary evidence to show your Mother was free from immigration time restrictions at the time of your birth, we are not able to issue a passport to you at this time…”.’
EIN Blog, 10th April 2024
Source: www.ein.org.uk
‘A lack of immigration advisers “encourages those who seek to provide advice illegally”, the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) has warned.’
Legal Futures, 10th April 2024
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Private Life immigration route was introduced along with many other changes to the rules in July 2012 to implement the government’s view of its obligations under Article 8 ECHR. These rules have been amended several times since then, often in response to judicial findings and particularly in relation to children and young adults, by which we mean those under 18, and those aged between 18 and 24.’
EIN Blog, 9th April 2024
Source: www.ein.org.uk
‘Albanians volunteering to be repatriated under a fast-track deportation deal are being detained unnecessarily for several weeks at taxpayers’ expense, the prisons watchdog has found.’
The Guardian, 8th April 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Changes that are now in force will slash migration and prevent the undercutting of British workers by employers looking to recruit cheap labour from overseas.’
Home Office, 4th April 2024
Source: www.gov.uk
‘Millions of Britons are barred from entering the EU by post-Brexit passport rules that are set to cause chaos over the Easter holidays. With the getaway starting in earnest on Thursday, an estimated 2.4 million travellers have documents that can’t be used for trips to the EU because of the change in expiry requirements.’
The Independent, 28th March 2024
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A recurring conundrum lies at the heart of current anti-trafficking law and policy. Despite enormous efforts by civil society organizations, corporations, and governments to reduce human trafficking in supply chains, and the introduction of legislation in various countries that requires corporations to take active actions in this field, there is wide agreement that, so far, the desired change has not occurred. This article addresses this puzzle through studying the vibrant anti-trafficking activity in the UK construction sector that emerged following the enactment of the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 (MSA). Applying socio-legal methods, the article unpacks the structural dynamics that shape the implementation of the MSA in the construction sector. We find that the Act exacerbates the imbalanced power relations between firms and anti-trafficking initiatives, positioning the latter as suppliers of modern slavery risk solutions that are dependent on corporate will and funding. The article demonstrates that anti-trafficking initiatives in the construction sector largely follow a “supply chain logic” that significantly limits their capacities to transform corporate behavior. We develop the notion of “anti-trafficking chains” to describe the dynamics of anti-trafficking activities in supply chains and to problematize the entanglement of anti-trafficking actors in supply chain power structure and logic.’
Law & Social Inquiry, 14th February 2024
Source: www.cambridge.org
‘The myriad problems with the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, as well as the policy that the Bill is supposed to facilitate, have been clearly documented. One common criticism is that the Bill would precipitate a “constitutional crisis” by provoking the courts into refusing to recognise its legal effect. Adam Tucker argues that the Bill’s most problematic sections could very well “count as a novel entry in our canon of possible limits of parliamentary sovereignty”. Jeff King argues that the House of Lords would be justified in radically amending or voting the Bill down, precisely because of the danger that it might incite a constitutional crisis. The Lords suggested sweeping amendments to the Bill, all of which were rejected by the Commons. The Bill will continue to go through a ping-pong process between each House before a final wording is settled.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 26th March 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Shamima Begum has lost her initial bid to challenge the removal of her British citizenship by taking her case to the Supreme Court.’
The Independent, 25th March 2024
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Sentencing Council is consulting on the first ever sentencing guidelines for immigration offences. The guidelines reflect legislative changes to the Immigration Act 1971 brought in by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022.’
Sentencing Council, 20th March 2024
Source: www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk
‘A small boat pilot has been jailed after crossing the Channel with more than 50 migrants in a perilously overcrowded dinghy.’
Home Office, 21st March 2024
Source: www.gov.uk
‘The House of Lords has inflicted fresh defeats on the government over its flagship Rwanda bill, meaning further delay to it becoming law.’
BBC News, 21st March 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024