EU residence documents: what are they good for? Apparently, not much – as ROR and Surinder Singh applicants find out the hard way

The UK government is well-known for grotesque interpretation of those few ECJ rulings that seem to go its way — just think McCarthy 1, the perverse interpretation of which by our government went on to necessitate Lounes. But no case, as I am starting to realise, has been as abused by the UK government as Dias.  Dias simply says that a residence card on its face does not, by itself, grant a right of residence. It is only evidence that conditions for that residence were met at the time the card was issued. Our government, across all its departments, now … Continue reading →

Trump immigration plan vs DACA: what will actually happen? Prediction

As you probably all know folks, US Immigration policy is in its highest pitch fever the last two weeks, that it’s been in almost three decades. Not since the reforms of the 1980s and 1990s has there been so much focus on immigration policy — which currently stands principally unchganged since the 1990s- and so much of a real chance that it will be dramatically overhauled. Something we in the UK experience every day, but the US is not used to. So, what are the proposals, will something actually get done,  and how is it likely to turn out? Trump … Continue reading →

Circus meets Kangaroo court: what is JR in admin court actually like

My friend and client had walked away ealier this month  from a JR application – we both lingered outside for a bit of where his oral renewal of permission hearing, which he paid for, was scheduled —  but decided not to go in. That is, when we found out that the judge assigned was an “employment law lion”, according to his biography. Permission on papers was denied by a medical law solicitor, sitting as a high court judge for unclear reasons. The government was represented by a lawyer qualified in New Zealand. Our JR was on a procedural question of EU … Continue reading →


As a birthday present to me today, the Home Office answered my latest FOI request in time, but alas it confirms our worst fears.  Following the horrifying case of two original EU passports vanishing in Durham without a trace and Home Office STILL doing NOTHING about it, compounded by my suspicions that the passports have been stolen at the Durham facility handled by an external contractor — and, further, my suspicion that HO will use the same or similar contractor to staff the entire new EU documents process,  I requested the details of WHO are the people entrusted with passports in Durham, which is supposed to, currently, constitute copying and returning of all the EU  and British passports. You can read the response in full on the attached link, as well as the job specification they sent. As you can see, the people in question are NOT civil servants,  and are not required to be UK or EEA citizens, which makes a threat to original documents very real. The HO appears to refuse to divulge the precise details and level of background checks needed.

FOI response

Job specification

New rules on continuous residence in PBS settlement: no more ILR-application-date-moving in order to fit the long absences in!

Heads up PBS migrants (Tier 1 and 2) applying for ILR!

From Thursday 11 January, new rules on calculating continuous residence come into effect, which put an end to “ILR application date shopping” in order to break long absences into separate 12-month periods. Now all absences will be assessed on a rolling basis, and you will have to not have had ANY 180+ day absences in ANY 12-month periods, not only those counted back from application date!

This will make some remaining T1G migrants permanenly ineligible for settlement and is a very worrying trend. I for one just expected them to relax the rules to help some people settle, and sense unusual hostility to remaining T1G migrants in this move.

{Rare} credit where it’s due goes to a  Freemovement blog associate who noticed this when the rest of us hadn’t.I now analyzed the text and believe now that she is right, the intention behind the change was exactly this (sadly).