- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha
This judge is effectively saying, "too bad for you, Zambrano carer".13. Regulations 16 and 20 are not listed in paragraph 6. It follows that they do not apply to the determination of an appeal after 31 December 2020. That is the case even if, immediately before that date, paragraphs 16 and 20 would have been relevant to the determination of the appeal. These provisions therefore have the effect that what might have been a good ground of an appeal based on the regulations in force at the time of an application, a decision, the launching of an appeal, or even during part of the progress of an appeal through the appellate system, cease to be provisions upon which reliance may be placed insofar as procedure on the appeal takes place after 31 December 2020.
14. Provisions to that effect seem at first sight to be surprising, and possibly unjust. After all, an appellant may not be able to control the speed at which an appeal does progress through the system; and the Secretary of State would appear to have power to deprive an appellant of a derivative residence card by appealing against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal in favour of an applicant, and so preventing the appeal from being finally determined before 31 December 2020.
15. The provisions do have that effect, but there is no injustice: because on that date the Zambrano entitlement ceased, so that even if a derivative residence card had been issued it would on that date cease to entitle its holder to remain in the United Kingdom; and no useful purpose would be served by allowing anybody to obtain a residence card by continuing an appeal after that date. Thus there is in fact no injustice in narrowing the rights or bases of an appeal during the progress of the appeal through the system. The provisions to which we have referred are simply part of the larger scheme of bringing the Zambrano rights, derived from EU law and not preserved by article 10 of the withdrawal agreement, to an end on IP completion day. Those whose rights of residence in the United Kingdom derived in EU law from their parental responsibility from a British citizen as a Union citizen can after that date no longer derive such a right from EU law. The British citizen child is not a citizen of the Union and the status of the child’s parents is governed by national law.
1.) If the Government intended for decisions around Regulations 16 and 20 to not be eligible for appeal, the Government would have said so. The absence of a mention does not automatically mean cancellation. It just means Regulations 16 and 20 are not specified. To specify means to state explicitly. There is no note to say unless specified, the provision is cancelled.13. Regulations 16 and 20 are not listed in paragraph 6. It follows that they do not apply to the determination of an appeal after 31 December 2020.
Hi Tina,Tina87 wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2023 3:21 amchopwell20 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 10:46 amThank you all for your congratulations. I submitted an appeal at the end of December, and it was allowed in early March. However, I have not received any letter from the Home Office indicating whether they accept or challenge the appeal. Surprisingly, the tribunal has no record of the permission to appeal being submitted even after 60 days. The Home Office is not responding with any further action, such as issuing settled status.marcidevpal wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 5:44 pmNAD WINS!!! HURRAH!!
Hi NAD,chopwell20 wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 3:33 pmDear MarcidevPAL
Thank you for your kind words. I deeply appreciate your dedication, guidance, and the value of the information you provided.
During the period of waiting for my appeal decision, I maintained a calm and focused demeanor, thanks to the invaluable assistance and guidance you provided me with. Your expertise and advice equipped me with the necessary tools to construct a compelling case and fortified my mindset for the upcoming battle.
I am immensely grateful to report that my appeal has been allowed. This outcome stands as a testament to the meticulous preparation and the professional approach we adopted throughout the process. Your guidance played a pivotal role in shaping the arguments and evidence presented, which ultimately led to this favorable resolution.
Once again, please accept my sincere appreciation for your unwavering support and the valuable insights you shared. Your contribution has not only assisted me in achieving a positive outcome but has also broadened my understanding and strengthened my skills for future endeavors.
Thank you for being an invaluable source of wisdom and inspiration, and for helping me navigate through this challenging phase of my life..
I thought maybe people could find a use for my suggestions.
I am humbled when people actually do work them into their submissions.
You perservered, even when things looked dire for Zambrano carers.
You did the work.
And I am beyond thrilled you won!!!
Britain is indeed a better country for granting residence to Zambrano carers like you.
I am also grateful to the judges for hearing your arguments. It shows they are listening.
Everyone, if you are there... Will you take a moment to please congratulate NAD?
NAD's win is a win not just for him and his family.
It's a win for us all.
Cheers,
MaricDevPal
I had a similar refusal in the past when I had valid FLR FP during the transition period. From 2014 to 2018, I had no legal status due to a separate case pending with the Home Office. This situation arose because my lawyer had deceived me, and I overstayed my visa. I challenged this matter with the ombudsman, but unfortunately, after a two-year process, there was no favourable outcome. The case was complicated further by the closure of the chamber, and no records could be found.
Regards and good wishes for all.
Thanks very much. Was it a paper appeal or oral hearing? As I submitted mine (paper) around November but when I call, they keep telling me no judge has been assigned to my case yet.So I was wondering.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk ... /2022/3274Vienna Convention, Section 3. INTERPRETATION OF TREATIES, Article 31, General rule of interpretation
1. A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.
2. The context for the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty shall comprise, in addition to the text, including its preamble and annexes:
(a) any agreement relating to the treaty which was made between all the parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty;
(b) any instrument which was made by one or more parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty and accepted by the other parties as an instrument related to the treaty.
3. There shall be taken into account, together with the context:
(a) any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions;
(b) any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation;
(c) any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties.
4. A special meaning shall be given to a term if it is established that the parties so intended.
MY THOUGHTSThe Court of Appeal has partially upheld the decision of Mr Justice Mostyn in finding that the Home Office’s rules for applications by Zambrano carers under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) are unlawful.
While the court held that Mostyn J was incorrect to find that the Secretary of State for the Home Department (the SSHD) misunderstood the requirements of the Zambrano jurisprudence under EU law,
it agreed with Mostyn J that she had misunderstood the requirements of domestic law, and thus the rules were unlawful.
He also said the UK is not respecting the Withdrawal Agreement. That is a violation of the Vienna Convention violation -“To be clear, the UK government, the current government, the next government knows exactly what are the terms and the conditions to be part of the single market to be part of the customs union to join the EU," he said.
"The point is not to sign a treaty, the point is to respect the treaty and to respect its own signature," Mr Barnier said of the ex-PM's approach....I never understood, I do not still understand, how the prime minister of such a country, a great country like the UK, can be able not to respect his own signature.”
Hey Marcidevpal,marcidevpal wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2023 10:26 amHuman Rights & Escalations
Celik's human rights appeal is just a few weeks away! The importance of this appeal can't be overstated.
Today, the House of Lords is considering secondary legislation (a statutory instrument) that restricts people's right to protest. The right to protest is proected under the United Nations Declaratio on Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Labour said they would abstain - or not vote against the statutory instrument. I believe Labour voted for or abstained on the statutory instruments for EUSS appeals - eventhough the 6 or 7 instruments do not mention human rights and make it incredibly difficult for Zambrano carers.
In Celik, President Lane said EUSS applicants can't rely on human rights. He argued the statutory instrument does not give judges the power to consider human rights - unless the Home Office gives them permission.
The connection here is the statutory instrument. Statutory instruments have become excuses for not recognising people's human rights. The 'people' affected may be migrants or protestors.
This point is important to understand. If you are a litigant in person, you probably don't just want to focus on the details of what the appeals statutory instrument says. You may want to take a position as to whether or not the instrument is lawful in the first place. That decision may lead you to launch a judicial review instead of a regular appeal. Or maybe not.
The central argument is that the UK agreed to be bound by the United Nations Declaration and the European Convention on Human Rights. Any legislation created by the Government that limits those rights is unlawful. Moreover, the judges have a duty under the ECHR to declare those statutory instruments as unlawful.
Finally, there is an irony here. Had the average, everyday person paid more attention to the bad statutory instruments put upon Zambrano carers, they might not be dealing with bad statutory instruments that are about to be put upon them. Bad public policies are like weeds. The keep growing and escalating.
Anyway, at the end of the day, I do not believe a statutory instrument should be allowed to invalidate any human right.
Bonjour Wishfulgirl,
Hi Marcidevpal,marcidevpal wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 5:37 pmBonjour Wishfulgirl,
They said not enough time? LOL!! Haven't they had it since January?
I wouldn't worry about it too much. If a judge has an easy reason to reject an application by a litigant in person, they don't hesitate.
If you raised or relied upon the Celik case in your submissions, then they probably want to wait until Celik. At this point, the Courts probably want to read what the Court of Appeal says in their decision before they decide similar pending cases.
Methinks there is movement on Akinsanya...Is anyone out there aware of progress on the next Akinsanya judicial review? Has Akinsanya been granted permission to launch a new judicial review?
They may delay all decisions until Celik or even Akinsanya is decided. My concern is the last time Akinsanya was decided, it didn't really help people that much.
marcidevpal wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 5:37 pmBonjour Wishfulgirl,
They said not enough time? LOL!! Haven't they had it since January?
I wouldn't worry about it too much. If a judge has an easy reason to reject an application by a litigant in person, they don't hesitate.
If you raised or relied upon the Celik case in your submissions, then they probably want to wait until Celik. At this point, the Courts probably want to read what the Court of Appeal says in their decision before they decide similar pending cases.
Methinks there is movement on Akinsanya...Is anyone out there aware of progress on the next Akinsanya judicial review? Has Akinsanya been granted permission to launch a new judicial review?
They may delay all decisions until Celik or even Akinsanya is decided. My concern is the last time Akinsanya was decided, it didn't really help people that much.
Que tal, Tina?
marcidevpal wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2023 8:25 pmQue tal, Tina?
The Home Office is the Respondent. The Home Office is supposed to send a bundle to the Court. Their bundle includes all of the information your caseworker relied upon when they made their decision.
If the Home Office does not upload the bundle to the Court's system, the judge will make a decision based on what your skeleton argument (and witness statement?) says and the refusal letter.
The Home Office should also mail you a copy of the bundle. If you don't get it by next week, tell the Court.
Either way, your case seems unlikely to be decided until after Celik. Celik's appeal before the Court of Appeal is on the 4th of July.
It looks like the judges don't want to work on the EUSS appeals until Celik. Everyone send positive energy to Mr Celik and his legal team!![]()
Halo again Tina,
You may also want to get in contact with people on this thread who were successful recently.
marcidevpal wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2023 8:08 amYou may also want to get in contact with people on this thread who were successful recently.
- Ask to see a copy of their submissions / skeleton arguments.
- Ask them what points their judges agreed with most strongly.
- Rewrite and resubmit your skeleton argument to use those same points (if applicable).
- With their permission, reference their cases in your updated skeleton argument.
*You may need to request permission to resubmit. It has been so long since you first submitted, I would think it should be ok.
Hiya NAD!