Judicial Review cost and time

[shaaki.fabi]

Hi members
My brother's visit was refused for reason she will not return back to her country at the end of her visa.
I want to take this matter for Judicial review, i want yo ask how long will it take and is it possible to speed up the process. And how much i will have to spend?
Thanks .

[shaaki.fabi]

Also what are chances of success?
Thanks

[Obie]

It depends on whether the reasons given for saying he will not return are cogent .

[shaaki.fabi]

It depends on whether the reasons given for saying he will not return are cogent .

Hi thanks obie for reply.
The reason visa was refused is that he came last year and stayed 5 months on 6 months visa, but he mentioned in the application that he is visiting for 2 months.
Only this is the reason
In the end ECO mentioned V4.2 (a)(c) paragraph.

[Wanderer]

It depends on whether the reasons given for saying he will not return are cogent .

Hi thanks obie for reply.
The reason visa was refused is that he came last year and stayed 5 months on 6 months visa, but he mentioned in the application that he is visiting for 2 months.
Only this is the reason
In the end ECO mentioned V4.2 (a)(c) paragraph.

I wouldn't bother if I were you.

[Casa]

This is now a common reason for refusal due to staying longer than the requested time. A JR is unlikely to achieve a positive outcome.

[Obie]

I beg to defer slightly.

If a person entered on a UK visa, which permits him or her to stay for a period of 6 months, he or she cannot be penalised for spending the time period granted by the visa.

I could have planned to visit UK for 2 months, but other plans came up and i decided to stay longer.

Provided I continued holidaying, and spending as a tourist, and not commit any crime or breach any rules, the fact that I spend a longer period than that which i previously mentioned, does not mean i adopted deception.

There is nothing in Appendix V 4.2(a) or 4.2(c), that justifies the action taken by the entry clearance officer.

The best course of Action is a JR, another ECO may well take similar approach if action is not taken.

[Casa]

Which doesn't support the increased reports on the forum of similar refusals.

This thread is just one example:
http://www.immigrationboards.com/genera ... d#p1385931

[Obie]

A person refused under Appendix V 4.2(a) or (c) , for speninding more time than they stated, even thought they were permitted to stay for the length of time they stayed, is just wrong, and totally inconsistent with Appendix V 4.2(a) or (c) .

The only remedy open to those people in the absence of a right of appeal under ECHR , is a JR.

No reasonable ECO could have used that provision to support such refusal.

[Casa]

It seems then that are a considerable number of unreasonable ECOs

[Wanderer]

I feel it's not an unreasonable posit, we all know that people say from the Sub Continent use VV's to live here half a year at a time, that's not in the spirit of the law, and neither are denials for the same, tit-for-tat obvs, but UKVI didn't start it...

I can fully empathise with their distrust.

[Obie]

V 4.2 The applicant must satisfy the decision maker that they are a genuine visitor. This means that the applicant:
(a) will leave the UK at the end of their visit; and
(b) will not live in the UK for extended periods through frequent or successive visits, or make the UK their main home; and
(c) is genuinely seeking entry for a purpose that is permitted by the visitor routes (these are listed in Appendices 3, 4 and 5); and
(d) will not undertake any prohibited activities set out in V 4.5 – V 4.10; and
(e) must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

My concerns is the law, and not what may be your view of people from the subcontinent.

All i know is that the refusal is not consistent with the Law.

[Wanderer]

V 4.2 The applicant must satisfy the decision maker that they are a genuine visitor. This means that the applicant:
(a) will leave the UK at the end of their visit; and
(b) will not live in the UK for extended periods through frequent or successive visits, or make the UK their main home; and
(c) is genuinely seeking entry for a purpose that is permitted by the visitor routes (these are listed in Appendices 3, 4 and 5); and
(d) will not undertake any prohibited activities set out in V 4.5 – V 4.10; and
(e) must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

My concerns is the law, and not what may be your view of people from the subcontinent.

All i know is that the refusal is not consistent with the Law.

Lols Obes!!

Have you ever sided with the UKVI on anything at all, ever?

[Obie]

If you care to read my post, you will notice that there are many instances where I have informed contributors that their refusal was in accordance with the law. My concern is the law.

It is my choice not to like the UKVI, if i so chooses.

Provided of course me view of the law is consistent with the law.

[Wanderer]

If you care to read my post, you will notice that there are many instances where I have informed contributors that their refusal was in accordance with the law. My concern is the law.

It is my choice not to like the UKVI, if i so chooses.

Provided of course me view of the law is consistent with the law.

So you admit to a bias?

[Casa]

My view in this instance is if it's irrelevant how long the applicant intends to stay within the 6 month validity of the visa, why are they required to state the length of the visit in the application?

For example, would the visa have been granted if they had requested a 5 month stay?

[Obie]

My view in this instance is if it's irrelevant how long the applicant intends to stay within the 6 month validity of the visa, why are they required to state the length of the visit in the application?

For example, would the visa have been granted if they had requested a 5 month stay?

I suspect the same question can be asked in the reverse. Why did they give them a period of 6 months to stay, if they only sought a 2 months visit.

Does the 6 months they were given counts for nothing?

One has to remember that the government had done series of consultation, they sought to reduce the period of stay to 3 months, they also sought to put a bounty of 3K for people who came from the so called at risk countries (funny).

After these consultations, it was decided that it was not in the UK's interest to change things, and nothing was done.

There are many instances, where a person had planned to spend 1 months, but due to reasons beyond their control, they decide to holiday for a longer period.

If those people decide to stay longer, provided it is in accordance with the law, i see no legal issue with that whatsoever.

[Obie]

Wanderer you seem a bit tired or tipsy even.

I think you can do with a bit of rest.

I don't blame you, after Mrs May and Mr Hammond's speech, i am not surprised that you feeling that way.

[Wanderer]

Wanderer you seem a bit tired or tipsy even.

I think you can do with a bit of rest.

I don't blame you, after Mrs May and Mr Hammond's speech, i am not surprised that you feeling that way.

No I'm just fed up with this UKVI is totally evil attitude, I agree they are not perfect, but ultimately they react to abuse by applicants, and I've been on this visa trail since 2003, and I've seen the pisstaking by applicants just get worse and worse, people contracting on T2, people on T1G contracting not paying any taxes at all and going home after 5 years, it's 50/50, I don't forgive or support any side, just I can see both sides.

It's only 19:00 here, I will be tipsy later if I can manage to walk past the pub, if anyone drinks more than the Brits, it's the Danes, but to be honest I've totally done my back in, recovering now but I think a Kylling med Pitabrød will do for me!

Then it's VPN and download tonights Coronation Street......

Brexit is doing a lot for me, the sinking pound making my earnings here in DK very lucrative except when I have to pay for something from my UK bank.....

Really razzing me off.....