There have recently been various confusing articles in the media about foreign students – or “international students”, as the current expression goes – dealing with such issues as how many of them are there in the UK? And do they go home when they have completed their studies? And should they go home when they have completed their studies? This was the typical type of newspaper headline (from The Times): Thousands of ex-students allowed to stay each year, which has a vaguely alarming quality.
When one cautiously enters the arena of debate about student immigration one often encounters the argument that British universities are some of the best in the world and that this is why they are so popular with international students, despite the Government’s allegedly student-unfriendly immigration policies. And, certainly, a lot of statistics and information support the idea that many of the world’s best universities are in the UK and the US. But British universities may have a slight edge over the American ones.
Has British citizenship been wrongly given to thousands of Europeans? And could it be taken away? Well, we certainly hope not, to both questions. The reason that this question suddenly and unexpectedly arises is a decision made by the Upper Immigration Tribunal in a case called “Capparrelli”. The decision has, or should have, high authority, as it was made by The Hon Mr Justice McCloskey (who is the President of the Upper Tribunal and on this occasion sitting alone). The case had a strong
There has been – in various ways – a very significant diminution in immigration appeal rights over the last few years. One of the ways in which this has occurred is that the Home Secretary has acquired legal powers to determine that, where there is a right of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal against a refusal of an immigration decision, the right of appeal can only be exercised from outside the UK. But of course the First-Tier Tribunal is physically located (at
Regular readers will know that we have on occasion explained that UK immigration law can be prodigiously complicated – and had a good moan about it. The venerable tradition of complexity, or perhaps confusion, has recently been upheld in a case in the High Court called “MK”. The presiding Judge was Mr CMG Ockleton – who is also Vice-President of the Immigration Upper Tribunal and is thus heavily involved in judicial immigration decision-making. The basic facts of the case seem at first
9 July 2012 was one of those famous days in the history of UK immigration law. It was the day when new family visa rules were introduced, specifically the formidable Appendix FM, which contains a remarkably intricate set of requirements for family visas, including the new Adult Dependant Relative visa requirements. The new rules replaced previous rules, to which they are different and are generally harsher. Under the previous rules adult dependants (parents, grandparents and other relatives) could apply for a
We would like to tell our readers a story. Long, long ago an Indian national (whose initials were apparently “SI”) had immigration leave in the UK as a student. He applied to extend his leave as a Tier 1 Post-Study Work migrant (a visa category that has now been abolished) but unfortunately the Home Office refused his application. SI decided to fight. In those days there was the right of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal for such cases, and he duly appealed.
Brexit is expected some time in 2019 but, as far as we know, European free movement rights will continue up until that point. So, for the moment, litigation in the European legal field carries on as normal. As is well known, EEA nationals living in the UK and exercising Treaty rights can bring their family members into the UK, even if such family members are not EEA nationals. Or can they? Well, as a primary and general principle they can. But what
Criminal convictions often have an effect on visa applications and generally – not surprisingly perhaps – a negative one. It is very often the case that a criminal conviction will occasion an automatic refusal of a visa application, however strong the application is otherwise. We could write a purely dry and technical article about this but, being Red Square London, we want to tell you a little (and informative) story. Recently, an American person called Jeremy Meeks landed at Heathrow Airport, hoping
The standard and traditional understanding about immigration appeals was that Government and Parliament could give or remove the right of appeal for unsuccessful visa applicants as they saw fit. Immigration appeals are heard, in the first instance, before the First-Tier Immigration Tribunal (formally known as the “First-Tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)”), which is an independent tribunal staffed by Immigration Judges, who are qualified lawyers. It is a proper legal forum, which deals thoroughly with the cases and issues before it. But