- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, Administrator
Against the background of the Home Office losing an important case last week ... it related to Certificates of Approval to Marry ..... and amazingly still no reaction to that on the BIA website ..... I am going to stick my neck out here ... and do fully appreciate that this is just my personal opinion ... I don't think that the change from 18 to 21 for fiance(e), spouse etc visas will ever happen!My question is what will happen to genuine cases like mine?
But how long did the CoA case take exactly? It was quite a while after the Certificates of Approval were introduced that I heard about the Home Office losing.if they did bring in such a blanket ban then the matter would get taken to Court and just as in the recent CoA case the Home Office would lose.
Not if the change is brought in as an Act of Parliament to amend the Immigration Act.John wrote:Or put it another way, if they did bring in such a blanket ban then the matter would get taken to Court and just as in the recent CoA case the Home Office would lose.
I hope you are right John, this smacks of punishing the many legitimate married or engaged couples to deal with a small number of forced marriages, Surely this is better dealt with using interviews and discretion. A one on one interview should be able to identify those who are being forced into a marriage they do not want.John wrote:Against the background of the Home Office losing an important case last week ... it related to Certificates of Approval to Marry ..... and amazingly still no reaction to that on the BIA website ..... I am going to stick my neck out here ... and do fully appreciate that this is just my personal opinion ... I don't think that the change from 18 to 21 for fiance(e), spouse etc visas will ever happen!My question is what will happen to genuine cases like mine?
That is, if the law allows people aged 18 to get married without parental consent who are the Home Office to impose a blanket ban on the issue of fiance(e), spouse etc visas to those aged 18, 19 or 20?
Or put it another way, if they did bring in such a blanket ban then the matter would get taken to Court and just as in the recent CoA case the Home Office would lose.
There is of course a broader public policy question of whether the marriage age itself should be increased to 21.Jon_H wrote: I hope you are right John, this smacks of punishing the many legitimate married or engaged couples to deal with a small number of forced marriages, Surely this is better dealt with using interviews and discretion. A one on one interview should be able to identify those who are being forced into a marriage they do not want.
I hope they are referring to sponsors here, otherwise that is really dodgy.Prem wrote:Hi there
Immigration overstayers will have their bank accounts frozen and families of overstayers will be barred from bringing in other relatives in future.
Prem
Not necessarily so; the Human Rights Act (esp. the article on right to family life) overrides any incompatible piece of legislation (inc. acts of parliament).JAJ wrote:Not if the change is brought in as an Act of Parliament to amend the Immigration Act.John wrote:Or put it another way, if they did bring in such a blanket ban then the matter would get taken to Court and just as in the recent CoA case the Home Office would lose.
Ultimately if community pressure to change the law is strong enough, the law will change and no judge will be able to prevent it.
No Chance. Even if this was a question within the remit of our Government it would and should have nothing whatsoever to do with Immigration.JAJ wrote:There is of course a broader public policy question of whether the marriage age itself should be increased to 21.Jon_H wrote: I hope you are right John, this smacks of punishing the many legitimate married or engaged couples to deal with a small number of forced marriages, Surely this is better dealt with using interviews and discretion. A one on one interview should be able to identify those who are being forced into a marriage they do not want.
Firstly, Parliament can exempt any piece of legislation from that Act if it so desires.tvt wrote:Not necessarily so; the Human Rights Act (esp. the article on right to family life) overrides any incompatible piece of legislation (inc. acts of parliament).
John, can you please provide a link to this case or source (highlighted text I meant).John wrote:Against the background of the Home Office losing an important case last week ... it related to Certificates of Approval to Marry ..... and amazingly still no reaction to that on the BIA website ..... I am going to stick my neck out here ... and do fully appreciate that this is just my personal opinion ... I don't think that the change from 18 to 21 for fiance(e), spouse etc visas will ever happen!My question is what will happen to genuine cases like mine?
That is, if the law allows people aged 18 to get married without parental consent who are the Home Office to impose a blanket ban on the issue of fiance(e), spouse etc visas to those aged 18, 19 or 20?
Or put it another way, if they did bring in such a blanket ban then the matter would get taken to Court and just as in the recent CoA case the Home Office would lose.
What possible justification could they have? Very very unlikely to waste Parliamentary time.JAJ wrote:The marriage age is within Parliament's jurisdiction - who else should decide fundamental questions like this?Jon_H wrote: No Chance. Even if this was a question within the remit of our Government it would and should have nothing whatsoever to do with Immigration.
See this BBC News Story.John, can you please provide a link to this case or source (highlighted text I meant).
It is not as easy as settled or not settled. Quite a number of people who are not settled in the UK can get married without requiring a CoA. In particular those holding a fiancé(e) visa or a Wedding Visitor visa do not need to obtain a CoA.do people who are not 'settled' still need permission to marry in the light of recent cases?
John, thanks for this. I know about this already but I was thinking if the courts have ruled this has illegal then, doesn't it make the rules concerning COA null and void? Or do they need a different ruling to implement that?In particular those holding a fiancé(e) visa or a Wedding Visitor visa do not need to obtain a CoA.
You just have to know that, the HO do not respond to judgements not in their favour until such times that they have successfully sought some sought of injunction or appeal. Lets wait and see what happens in the next few days if they would indeed post something. I might be wrongI just express amazement that the Home Office has not reacted to the Court of Appeal decision last week .
I do not see why that in itself would render a change to the Immigration Rules unlawful. It is already the case that a legal marriage does not create an automatic entitlement to a spouse visa.Smit wrote:If this requirement is introduced by simply amending the immigration rules, it is bound to be challenged successfully in the courts because the minimum age for marriage without the consent of a parent(s) or guardian under the Marriage Act 1949, as amended by the Family Law Act 1969, is 18 years.
Could be done in a few days if given sufficient priority.The Home Office would need to secure passing the proposed requirement as primary legislation i.e via an Act of Parliament and this would take a long long time.