I get a lot of questions from people who are confused as to who exactly was exempt from WRS when it was enacted in 2004 — in fact, it seems from UKVI’s own internal documents that many of those confused on this point are its own employees! UKVI does not even have an internal document that lists, or explains, all of the exemptions.
I finally found the primary legislation that set up and explained the WRS and who is exempt from it – enjoy!
You will note of course that originally, as in this document, it was to last until 30 April 2009. This is now AGAIN th ecase, as the legislation extending it to 2011 was found unlawful, as confirmed in Gubeladze v SSWP (TG v SSWP) by the Court of Appeals. Don’t expect UKVI to amend any of its policy, but you can try to rely on it.
Now that the “Windrush scandal” has claimed the head of the Home Secretary, it is time to reflect on all this. I am no friend of the Tory party, but am always cautious of any Guardian-led immigration hysteria, as well. Now, the Guardian was right to raise this, and of course it is outrageous etc etc. Yet, is there not a cautionary tale within about one’s personal responsibility? An umpteenth article about the so-called “Windrush scandal” in the Guardian recently condemned former immigration minister Damian Green for suggesting, 7 years back, that keeping evidence of one’s immigration status was that … Continue reading →
Gone are the days when the Home Office presenting officers’ brightest ideas on fudging their appeal statistics were to deliberately misrecord the results on CID as “allowed on human rights grounds” instead of “allowed under the immigration rules”, so that it will look like Home Office was never wrong in the first place (appeals allowed on human rights grounds are not counted in their internal statistics as failures). But imagine winning in the Tribunal, but then waiting MORE THAN A YEAR with UKVI simply stonewalling requests to implement the decision – to later find out that HO had NEVER RECORDED … Continue reading →
Please spread the word to help me start my practice in the United States, which I hope to do next year – for this, I need to take the Bar exam in California this summer – and for that, I need to pay off my Temple University LLM tuition! Without that I can’t get the transcript to send to the Bar and won’t be allowed to sit the exam ((
Those who follow by bio closely will ask, what about me having attended law school in the US years ago? It is true, but at that time I did not graduate and, although I could combine those credits with my UK LLB degree, I was missing a required subject for the CA Bar. In the end the whole thing turned out to be curable now only by undertaking a whole LLM in the US!
Every dollar matters — especially since, I think, if at least anyone donated anything, it will help get the campaign going! You also get to watch a cute of me discussing my practice, produced by my 12-year old daughter )
The most problematic UK immigration application form FLR(FP) is used for many applications involving so-called “private life claims”, including those under the Immigration rules (Appendix FM 10-year partner routes, 5-year and 10-year parent routes, Private life under para 276 ADE), as well as by anyone who just thinks that they might file an application – called applications “outside the rules”. The position of all of these groups of people is quite different. Applicants under Immigration Rules, if they qualify, are technically entitled to their leave to remain. There is no discretion, although in many cases consideration of those applications will … Continue reading →