‘Theresa May has refused to intervene in the case of Albert Thompson, the London cancer patient asked to pay £54,000 for treatment despite having lived in the UK for 44 years, as it emerged that there could be tens of thousands of people in a similarly uncertain immigration position.’
The Guardian, 22nd May 2018
‘This seminar, organised jointly by the Bar Council and the Deutscher Anwaltverein (German Bar Association), will offer a platform for a discussion on the legal consequences of Brexit.
It will include topics such as the Art. 50 Litigation and the consequences for constitutional law and passporting and mutual recognition in financial services post-Brexit.’
Date: 20th October 2017, 2.00-5.00pm
Location: The General Council of the Bar, 289 – 293 High Holbon, WC1V 7HZ London
Charge: See website for details
More information can be found here.
‘The Home Office has confirmed that where it holds the passport of a migrant who wishes to sit the Secure English Language Test (SELT) it will either return the passport to enable the migrant to sit the SELT or will confirm directly with the SELT centre that the passport is held and is genuine.’
Free Movement, 23rd September 2016
‘Last year 32,446 people subject to immigration control in the UK were detained by the government. Some had entered the country irregularly and were quickly removed. Others were detained pending removal or deportation. More than half of them were released back into the community, meaning that their detention had served no purpose.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th June 2016
‘Technical”, “deeply unattractive”, “disingenuous”, “singularly lacks merit”, “ridiculous”, “inappropriate”, “extraordinary”. All words used by Elias or Vos LLJ to describe the arguments advanced by the Home Office in the course of their judgments in the remarkable case of R (On the Application Of Ufot) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 298.’
Free Movement, 16th May
‘The defendant. a Ghanaian national, held a non-European Union passport. His wife, also a Ghanaian national, assumed the identity of a deceased Ghanaian national, who had had Dutch citizenship, and obtained a Dutch identification card and a Dutch passport under that false identity. The defendant and his wife had an infant daughter. On the false premise that he and the daughter were entitled to reside in the United Kingdom by virtue of his wife’s falsely assumed status as a European Union national, the defendant obtained residence cards, each in the form of a Home Office stamp in a non-European Union passport, for himself and the daughter. On three occasions the defendant used his passport, containing the residence card stamp, to enter the United Kingdom, and on one occasion he used it to open a bank account in there. The defendant and his wife were charged with various immigration and documentation offences. The defendant pleaded guilty to eight counts, charged as follows: (i) seeking or obtaining leave to enter or remain in the UK by the deception of applying to the Home Office for a residence card for himself (count 2) and for a certificate of naturalisation (count 12), contrary to section 24A(1)(a) of the Immigration Act 1971; (ii) facilitating the commission of a breach of section 10(1)(c) of the “Immigration Act 1999” by obtaining leave for his daughter to enter or remain in the UK by the deception of applying to the Home Office for a residence card for her, contrary to section 25(1) of the 1971 Act (count 3); (iii) possessing false identity documents with intent, contrary to section 25(1) of the Identity Cards Act 2006 (counts 4 to 7); and (iv) being in possession or control with intent of an identity document, namely a British passport in his own name that he knew or believed to have been improperly obtained in February 2012, contrary to section 4 of the Identity Documents Act 2010 (count 13).’
WLR Daily, 16th March 2016