The UK Government has released a toolkit aimed at assisting employers who are employing EU Nationals, or who employ family members of EU nationals. This toolkit will be very useful for any employers who currently rely upon employing EU nationals or their family members, or who may wish to do so in the future.

One of the negotiation items which has been agreed between the UK and the EU is that all EU nationals and their family members who currently reside in the UK, or who arrive in the UK before the end of December 2020, will need to apply for ‘settled status’.

There will be a need to make an application for all EU nationals, regardless of whether they have already been issued with documents by the government proving their right to stay.

If any EU nationals do not make an application before June 2021, other than Irish nationals, who are a special category and will not need to apply, then they will no longer have a right to remain in the UK and they will no longer have a right to work.

This places the employee at risk of breaching criminal laws by working without permission, and places employers at risk of civil fines for employing people where they do not have a right to work.

There are approximately 3 million people in the UK who must make an application to avoid becoming unlawfully present. Whilst the Home Office will have discretion to allow applicants in special circumstances to apply after the cut-off date, there is a high risk that any out of time application will be automatically rejected.

The government have released a toolkit for Employers as part of their information campaign to spread awareness of the need for employees to make an application and to avoid finding themselves unlawfully in the UK.

The toolkit that has been released consists of:

  • Key things that Employers need to know
  • Key Information that can be used for ‘presentations’ or ‘face-to-face events’ or ‘webinars’ with EU Citizen Employees
  • Information Videos
  • Leaflets which can be provided to EU Citizen employees
  • Posters which can be placed in communal areas spreading information

The information has been provided in a way that allows employers to pass on the relevant information without needing to interpret it. The information has been summarised to highlight the key points without going into the nitty gritty. A more detailed statement of intent provides much more information over what the settled status scheme will involve.

There is no legal obligation for employers to provide information to their employees, and, although employers may contribute towards the costs of employees making applications, there is no requirement for them to do so. It is however important that employers do not provide immigration advice to employees as this is not permitted without the necessary accreditation.

To access the governments toolkit click here.

Paragon Law have delivered seminars, workshops and one-to-one advice for EU employees and their family members to provide assistance in light of Brexit. If you are concerned about the potential negative impacts on your workforce, and you employ EU nationals or their family members, please get in touch with your usual Paragon Law contact or contact us at enquiries@paragonlaw.co.uk

to see what support we may be able to provide you.

HMT Empire Windrush

An article by Karen Rimmer, Paragon Law

On 22 June 1948 the ship MV Empire Windrush arrived at Tilbury Docks, Essex, bringing workers from Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and other islands, as a response to post-war labour shortages in the UK. The ship carried 492 passengers – many of them children.

This now infamous docking has given its name to a generation of people present in the UK who have come to represent the devastating impact that so many recent drastic changes of legislation and Immigration Rules have had on our society.

In 2012, official figures showed that net immigration was still running at about 250,000 a year, well above the “tens of thousands” that the Conservatives promised the Coalition would deliver. In response to this, Theresa May gave a speech in Parliament about her wish to ensure fairness by introducing a new Immigration Bill[1]. At the time, she told the Telegraph newspaper that it was her aim to “to create here in Britain a really hostile environment for illegal migration”. [2] There has been much media coverage of the speech Mrs May gave in parliament that day. She loudly declared:

Part 3 of the Bill is about migrants’ access to services. We want to ensure that only legal migrants have access to the labour market, health services, housing, bank accounts and driving licences. This is not just about making the UK a more hostile place for illegal migrants – it is also about fairness. Those who play by the rules and work hard do not want to see businesses gaining an unfair advantage through the exploitation of illegal labour. They don’t want to see our valuable public services – paid for by the taxpayer – used and abused by illegal migrants.”

The reality is, however, that even those migrants perfectly legally present have been impacted by the measures taken, and found themselves in dire straits. The Windrush generation are a prime example of this.

The Immigration Act 1971 allowed for those who came from Commonwealth countries to remain in the UK indefinitely and to be exempt from deportation in certain circumstances. However, recent changes in the law have meant that gradually more and more responsibility for immigration control has been delegated to every day service providers.

The hostile environment created by government changes have resulted in the need to present valid ID and proof of immigration status for tenancies, bank accounts, a driving licence, employment opportunities and access to benefits, access to NHS care and financial support. It is also important, as legal professionals have discovered, that the proof of status, is in the correct format. In the current climate, those immigrants who entered the UK prior to the introduction of the new-style biometric residence permit struggle to convince employers of their right to work.

Initial experiences of the Windrush generation came in September 2012, when many people were wrongly accused of having overstayed. A variety of methods were used to inform people of this accusation. Initially, letters were sent. The letters indicated that, without evidence of their right to stay, people would be expected to leave the UK immediately or it would be made difficult for them to remain in the UK. This was usually followed up by a barrage of texts, phone calls and even, in extreme circumstances, knocks on the door.

The government’s response to this was to ask people to make an application to prove their right to remain in the UK. This application, at the time, cost £220[3] (currently £229). Unsurprisingly, many people were not aware of this requirement, and those who were did not apply for various reasons, not least because of the fee. The result of not applying was that many people lost their benefits entitlement, were suspended from work, some even losing their jobs because of the risk of prosecution for employers or have been threatened with eviction. It is also impossible to travel to and from the UK without proof of your immigration status and a national passport (something also required for any paid immigration application at present)

As a firm, we have experienced cases where people have been made homeless, those on long-term sick have had to rely on the support of family and friends whilst their benefits were investigated.

The government officially states, in a statement on the Gov website[4], that they recognise that people will not have documents from 40 years ago. They go on to state that the types of documents that can help an application are exam certificates, employment records, your National Insurance number, birth and marriage certificates, bills and letters.

The reality is that they require a much more detailed demonstration of time spent in the UK. They must be satisfied from the evidence that the applicant has not left the UK for more than 2 years at any time during the period that they have lived in the UK. Some applicants are required to provide documentary evidence to cover every single year of over 60 years residence, which amounts to vast swathes of documents. Routinely, legal practitioners find that, despite a consenting signature to a background check of records, such checks are not carried out. If they were, then it would be seen that the generation of Windrush applicants had validly been present for the requisite time, without them having to be threatened with deportation. The onus is placed squarely on the individual to apply with the right documents, and a correctly completed application or it will be rejected as invalid.

Adding to the trauma of attempting to meet the documentary threshold is the fact that, in recent days, it has come to light that thousands of landing cards were destroyed[5], a phenomenon that we as a firm have come across resulting in difficulty for our clients. It is unclear what it was hoped that this action achieved.

Scaremongery and fear tactics have caused anxiety amongst a generation of people who originally only came to the UK to assist with the post-war effort. They legitimately assumed that they were legally present. Indeed, they were, but did not have the proof to show it.

It is important to receive advice and representation as soon as possible when the Secretary of State indicates that she believes that you may not be legally present in the UK. We can assist with document gathering and make representations to demonstrate eligibility to benefit from the concessions that allowed for indefinite stay in the UK for the Windrush generation. Obtaining sound legal advice early in the process can help to prevent the possibility of removal action being taken at all.


 

To find out more on this subject please contact the writer, Karen Rimmer, at karenr@paragonlaw.co.uk

 

 

 

 

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/speech-by-home-secretary-on-second-reading-of-immigration-bill

[2] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9291483/Theresa-May-interview-Were-going-to-give-illegal-migrants-a-really-hostile-reception.html

[3] http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121206084216/http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/aboutus/fees/

[4] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/undocumented-commonwealth-citizens-resident-in-the-uk/undocumented-commonwealth-citizens-resident-in-the-uk

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/17/home-office-destroyed-windrush-landing-cards-says-ex-staffer

Home Office Fees

Every year, the fees that are charged for immigration applications, are reviewed and changed. In the past few years, the increase in fees charged has been dramatic and, on occasion, left Applicants struggling to save the required fees to pay for applications before their leave expired.

 

For example, the cost of a family consisting of two parents and two children applying from within the UK for indefinite leave to remain in 2014 would have been £4,372. The same application made now would cost the same family £9,188.

Another example is an applicant applying for leave to remain as a spouse in 2014, would have paid a fee of £601. Nowadays, taking into account the Immigration Health Surcharge, the same application would cost £1,493.

Traditionally, the Home Office have raised fees on the 6th April each year (although they did catch everyone by surprise by raising the fees on the 18th March in 2016). This year will be no different from the normal however, and the Home Office have confirmed that fees will be raised from the 6th April 2018.

Further, the actual Home Office fee increases have now been announced and are available to view here. Although, as anticipated, the fees have gone upwards, the good news is that the rise is not as meteoric as it has been in previous years. In most application types, the Home Office fees have gone up by 4%.

Here are some examples of what the new fees will look like:

In Country Applications

Application Type Current Fee New Fee from 6th April 2018
Indefinite Leave to Remain £2,297 £2,389
Leave to Remain (example as a family member) £993 £1,033
Tier 2 General £677 £704
Naturalisation Fee £1,282 £1,330
European Residence Card £65 £65 (no change)

 

Entry Clearance Applications

Application Type Current Fee New Fee from 6th April 2018
Visit Visa (< 6 months) £89 £93
Settlement £1,464 £1,523
Adult Dependent Relative £3,250 £3,250

 

As can be seen, a rise of 4% is still pretty significant when you are dealing with large sums in the first place, and Applicants will be trying to get their applications submitted before the 6th April 2018 to avoid the higher fee.

Immigration Health Surcharge

As well as the normal Home Office fee increases, the Home Office have confirmed that the Immigration Health Surcharge, introduced in 2015, will be DOUBLING. This is a significant increase in the cost that Applicants applying for limited leave to remain will have to pay.

For Example, an Applicant who is currently applying for leave to remain as a spouse needs to pay:

Home Office fee – £993

Immigration Health Surcharge – £500

Total Cost – £1,493

However, after the Immigration Health Surcharge fee and Home Office fees go up, the same applicant will need to pay:

Home Office Fee – £1,033

Immigration Health Surcharge – £1,000

Total Cost – £2,033

Official Confirmation has not been provided as to when the Immigration Health Surcharge will go up, but it would be sensible to assume that it will go up from the 6th April 2018 (or even sooner!). Applicants should try and get applications submitted as soon as possible if they have the choice of applying before the fee rises.

When to Submit your Application

It is very important that Applicants who are preparing to make extension applications, submit their applications as soon as possible if they want to avoid the fee increase. This will only be possible if you qualify for an extension of leave before the 6th April 2018. If you have the choice of whether to apply now or later, you may decide you wish to apply now and avoid any additional fees that will otherwise need to be paid.

It is important that if Applicants are trying to avoid the fee rises, they remember the date the application is considered to be made depends on what type of application is being made and how it is submitted.

For non-citizenship postal applications, the date the application is made is the date that the application is posted (always retain proof of postage and used a tracked delivery service).

However, for citizenship postal applications, the date the application is made is the date that it is received by the Home Office.

Tip: Historically, where Applicants have applied to the Home Office using the same day premium service, the Home Office have only charged the fee which is paid by the Applicant when the appointment is booked, even if the appointment takes place after the fee rise. It may be that the Home Office will continue this practice this year and Applicants can avoid paying the higher fees if they book and pay for their same day service prior to the 6th April 2018 even for appointments taking place after that date.

 

 

Paragon Law Managing Director, Thalej, Vasishta, explores the Points Based System immigration law changes which are coming into play in 2018:

 

 

 

 

Tier 4 (General) Switch to Tier 2 (General)

Students who hold a Tier 4 (General) visa no longer have to wait for their final results to be released by their academic institution before switching to the Tier 2 (General) category. Instead, students can now make the application as soon as they have finished their course. This will not, however, apply to individuals on PHD courses.

Family members of points-based system migrants

Dependent partners of applicants in the UK under the points-based system (including Tier 1 and Tier 2) will now also be brought under the same requirements whereby they are not permitted to be out of the country for more than 180 days in any 12-month period during the qualifying period in order to qualify for indefinite leave to remain. This change will apply to partners who are granted new periods of leave after 11 January 2018. Therefore, even those partners who have already been granted leave before this date will be subject to the new rules following any grant or extension of leave post 11 January 2018. A further requirement is that dependent family members will have to prove that their relationship to the applicant is “genuine” as part of any applications after 11 January 2018.

Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent)

There are two main changes coming into effect in 2018:

  1. The number of visas available for this category will increase from 1,000 to 2,000 per year for the 12 months from 6 April 2018. The additional 1,000 visas will be held separately, in an unallocated pool, which will be distributed on a first come first serve basis; and
  2. “World leaders” in their field of expertise may be able to qualify for accelerated indefinite leave to remain after three years, rather than the usual five years. This will not apply to those holding an “exceptional promise” visa.

Tier 2 visa holders

Tier 2 visa holders who have more than 60 days’ gap between holding Tier 2 jobs will no longer be prevented from applying for indefinite leave to remain when they have accrued five years’ employment in the UK. This means that applicants will no longer have to be employed continuously throughout the five-year qualifying period to be eligible for settlement.

If you have any further queries please contact Thalej Vasishta on 0115 9644 123 or thalejv@paragonlaw.co.uk

Decla Palmer of Paragon Law explains the changes and why more needs to done to help victims of modern slavery:

 

 

 

The National Referral Mechanism (NRM) is the process by which potential victims of modern slavery are identified as victims and provided with support.

If the decision is positive, meaning that the NRM has recognised the individual as a victim of modern slavery, that person has two weeks to leave his or her safe house accommodation and specialist support is withdrawn at the same time. Many organisations have criticised the current procedure for leaving individuals vulnerable and at risk of further exploitation. There is a significant risk that victims of modern slavery will be left destitute, become homeless and disappear. Not all victims of modern slavery will be offered any form of leave to remain and those that do will only be offered one year. Often the prospect of having to return to their country of origin is enough for people to go underground and choose not to engage with services for fear they will be forced to return.

The Home Secretary has announced that recognised victims of modern slavery will now have access to ‘move-on’ support for up to 45 days after the positive Conclusive Grounds decision. There will also be the opportunity for victims to attend drop-in services for up to six months after leaving support. It is likely that these changes will be welcomed by NGOs however the issue of a person’s immigration status still remains. If that person is not granted leave to remain as a victim of modern slavery then they will be expected to return to their country of origin either voluntarily or by force unless they make another application to regularise their stay. The Home Secretary has not announced that she intends to grant all recognised victims with six months leave to remain at the very least so they can access the support she is now offering. It is worth noting that the US has a specialist victim of trafficking three year visa with a view to settlement. If the Home Secretary did feel strongly about protecting victims of modern slavery, more could be done to make sure they receive the support they need and protect them from re-exploitation in the long term. Many forms of psychological treatment cannot start until a person’s immigration status is secure. Secure immigration status also prevents re-exploitation by providing that person with access to the welfare state and with victims more likely to come forward as they would not fear removal.

Potential child victims of modern slavery do not currently receive any specialist support with the Government relying solely on social services to care for them. The current situation does not recognise that, like adults, child victims require specialist psycho-social support to recover from their experiences. Child victims are especially vulnerable due to the separation from their family. Section 48(1) of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 does provide for the appointment of Independent Child Trafficking Advocates (ICTAs). The Government has piloted the scheme twice, and has on 26 October 2017 announced the programme will be rolled out nationally.

Specialist support for child victims is certainly welcome given the current situation. Section 48 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 makes clear that these advocates will be independent from the decision maker. However, it does not state that the advocate has a duty of confidentiality to the child.

Furthermore, it is unclear whether it will be a requirement of the process that a child has an independent advocate prior to the investigation stage of the process. If the government do not provide enough advocates, it may be that a requirement to have one could cause significant delays to the process. Delays are often not in the best interests of children. The Act also provides that the ICTA can appoint and instruct a legal representative. It is not clear at this stage whether this means that the ICTA would be the individual instructing the legal representative rather than the child. Currently, unaccompanied minors who are deemed mature enough to understand advice and give instructions are not required to have a guardian to instruct on their behalf. If this is what parliament intended by this provision, the concern again would be whether the ICTA has a duty of confidentiality to the child and the significant delays in obtaining legal advice should the government not provide enough ICTAs. It is also not clear who the ICTAs will be accountable to and where a child can take a complaint should she or he take issue with the ICTAs performance or behaviour.

Whilst the changes announced are welcomed, it is clear that more needs to be done to ensure the rights and needs of victims of modern slavery are full provided for.

Paragon Law’s dedicated Asylum & Human Rights team represents many victims of modern slavery and should you have any questions or queries on this area of law, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0115 9644 123 or email declap@paragonlaw.co.uk

What are the new Rules on the minimum income requirement to sponsor your spouse or partner to join you in the UK? 

Aldijana Hoad of Paragon Law explains:

 

 

The Home Office has published new guidance on the minimum income requirement following the Supreme Court judgement in the case of MM (Lebanon) & Others v SSHD [2017] UKSC 10.

The case of MM (Lebanon) considered the lawfulness of the minimum income requirement, brought into force on 9 July 2012, which requires a minimum income of £18,600 (or higher where dependent children are involved) for British citizens and settled persons to sponsor their non-EU national spouse. The Supreme Court found that the minimum income requirement was lawful, but that the Home Office’s rules needed to be amended to take proper account of best interests of children involved in such applications and other possible sources of income and support. The Home Office consequently amended the Immigration Rules (“the Rules”) in July 2017 and guidance has now been issued on how the Rules will be implemented. The new Rules apply to all decisions taken after 10 August 2017 regardless of the date of application.

The guidance reflects a two stage approach that will be taken by the Home Office.

Stage 1

First, the Home Office will consider whether the minimum income requirement of £18,600 is met through the following specified sources:

  • Income from salaried or non-salaried employment of the partner.
  • Non-employment income e.g. income from property rental or dividends from shares.
  • Cash savings of the applicant and/or partner above £16,000.
  • State, occupational or private pension of the applicant and/or partner.
  • Income from self-employment, and income as a director or employee of a specified limited company in the UK, of the partner (and/or the applicant if they are in the UK with permission to work).
  • Where applicant’s partner is in receipt of benefits such as Disability Living Allowance, Carer’s Allowance, Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit, etc. the applicant is exempt from meeting the minimum income requirement but instead has to provide evidence of ‘adequate maintenance’.

If the minimum income requirement is met through the sources listed above, the applicant will be granted leave under the 5-year route to settlement. If it is not met, the Home Office will consider whether the requirement can be met through alternative sources of income but only in cases, where there is evidence of exceptional circumstances, which could result in unjustifiably harsh consequences for the applicant, their partner or a relevant child, if the application is refused. In such cases, the following alternative sources of income will be taken into account:

  • third party support.
  • prospective earnings from employment or self-employment of applicant and partner.
  • any other credible and reliable source of income available.

The new guidance contains detailed criteria on which the Home Office will rely to assess the genuineness, credibility and reliability of the above sources. Each case will be considered on its own merits, in the light of all the information and evidence provided by the applicant. If the minimum income requirement is met through alternative sources of income, the applicant will be granted leave under the 10-year route to settlement.

The Home Office defines “unjustifiably harsh consequences” as the ones which involve a hard outcome(s) for the applicant or their family which is not justified by the public interest, including maintaining effective immigration controls, preventing burdens on the tax payer, promoting integration, etc. It involves consideration of whether refusal would be proportionate, taking into account, all facts of the case and, as a primary consideration, the best interests of any relevant child.

In June 2017, the Home Office had around 5,000 applications on hold pending an amendment to the Rules. The Home Office will now be considering these applications and where there are exceptional circumstances and refusal could result in unjustifiably harsh consequences, the applicants will be contacted in writing and given 21 days to provide evidence of alternative sources of income. This evidence will be considered in addition to the evidence provided already.

Stage 2

Secondly, where an applicant does not meet the minimum income requirement and/or other requirements under the Rules, the Home Office will consider whether there are exceptional circumstances which would result in unjustifiably harsh consequences for the applicant, their partner or a relevant child if the application is refused. Where there are such circumstances, the applicant will be granted leave under the 10-year route to settlement.

If you require advice on whether you meet the minimum income requirement or have received a letter from the Home Office asking you to provide evidence of alternative sources of income within 21 days, please contact our offices on 0115 9644 123 or enquiries@paragonlaw.co.uk and we will be happy to assist you.

International Students

The UK Government has published a number of reports relating to international students and their impact on net migration.  The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, has also commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to undertake a review of the impact of international students by September 2018.

The most significant finding in the Reports is that 97.4% of international students return home prior to their visas expiring (2016/17) and proves, contrary to the rhetoric by successive Home Secretaries and certain sections of the media, that international students do not overstay. Many will argue that the statistics collated from exit checks at airports confirms what Universities have said all along. The ONS report is available here.

My firm, Paragon Law, count 6 Universities amongst our client base on immigration law matters related to international students and overseas academics. I, like many Vice-Chancellors and business leaders, have put forward to the Government the positive contribution that international students make to the local and national economy. In terms of income, this has been valued to be in the region of £26 billion for the economy but more so our world class universities attract the brightest and the best from around the world. This enhances the experience and network for home students, helps to facilitate cross border research and builds bridges for future trade and investment into the UK. At a time when the UK is trying to negotiate trade deals around the world, the importance of international students returning home and becoming leaders in their field should not be underestimated.

Whilst this should be obvious to the Government it is nonetheless welcome that the Home Secretary has written to the MAC asking it to undertake an objective assessment of the impact of international students. It has been asked to consider both EU and non-EU students at all levels of education. The key areas of focus asked of the MAC are to evaluate the social and economic impact of international students and in particular:

  • The impact of tuition fees and spending by international students on the local and national economy and in the education sector;
  • The impact of international students on the labour market, housing, transport, other services and the role they play in contributing to local economic growth;
  • Breakdown of impact by type and level of course, and institution;
  • The impact of international students on the provision and quality of education provided to domestic students’.

The MAC will no doubt publish a consultation document inviting educational institutions, businesses and others interested to contribute to their findings. This will be a welcomed step and it is important that you contribute through written representations and present evidence of the positive, present and future contribution that international students make to the UK. The letter to the MAC can be viewed here

Paragon Law have assisted organisations with written representations to previous MAC consultations. Should you require our assistance please contact Thalej Vasishta on mailto:thalejv@paragonlaw.co.uk.

 

 

As negotiations with the EU have now properly commenced, one of the first priorities on both sides is to agree what will happen to EEA nationals living in the UK, and for British Citizens living abroad in other EU countries. The UK have now published a document ‘Safeguarding the Position of EU Citizens Living in the UK and UK Nationals Living in the EU’ which provides us with some long-awaited detail about what will happen to EEA nationals once the UK leaves the EU. This article summarises some of the key pieces of information disclosed in the publication for EEA nationals and their right to remain in the UK. I have also identified some key information that we do not yet know.

There will be changes
The document published confirms that as the UK wish to have the option of controlling migration from EU countries, there will be a new system which requires all EU nationals and their family members to apply for status documents proving their right to live in the UK.

The government’s proposals confirm:
“This will be a legal requirement but there is also an important practical reasons for this. The residence document will enable EU citizens (and their families) living in the UK to demonstrate to third parties (such as employers or providers of public services) that they have permission to continue to live and work legally in the UK. Following the UK’s exit from the EU, the Government may wish to introduce controls which limit the ability for EU citizens (and their families) who arrive in the UK after exit to live and work here…”
The document confirms the application procedure will be announced in more detail closer to the time, but that the application will be made ‘as streamlined and user-friendly as possible’. For example, the government will seek to minimise the burden of providing documentary evidence and access existing government data held such as income records.
Further, the government have confirmed that all EEA nationals will need to apply for this new form of status, even those who have previously been granted documents showing they have a right of permanent residence in the UK. However, they will aim to make the system ‘as streamlined as possible’ for those in this situation.

Who will qualify for Status Documents?
Currently, EEA nationals qualify for a right of permanent residence once they have lived in the UK as a ‘qualified’ person for a continuous period of 5 years. This has presented difficulties for many EEA nationals who may have had breaks in their ‘qualified status’. One common problem is that many EEA nationals were not aware that they were required to hold a private medical insurance policy or other insurance cover to be a ‘qualified’ person whilst they were a student.
This system is going to be replaced with new criteria for EEA nationals. The government have indicated that there will be two primary criteria to qualify:
1) That the applicant has been ‘resident’ in the UK for a set period of time (most likely to be 5 years); and
2) The applicant is not considered a threat to the UK on an assessment of their criminality and conduct.
Happily, the government have confirmed that they will no longer require evidence of holding insurance documents in order to be considered continuously resident. This will enable many EEA nationals to apply for ‘settled’ status under the new system who would not qualify for a permanent residence document under the current set of rules that apply to EEA nationals.
The published offer further confirms that, as long as an EEA national arrives before a particular ‘specified date’ then they will be given the opportunity to establish 5 years residence and qualify for settled status. We have not yet been told what the ‘specified date’ will be, but we know that it will fall between the 29th March 2017 and the date that the UK leaves the EU. This date is to be decided following negotiations with the rest of the EU.
The document also confirms that ‘family members’ of EEA nationals will also be able to apply for settled status following 5 years continuous residence.
If an Applicant will not have reached the 5 year point before the UK leaves the EU, they will be given a grace period within which to apply, and if necessary, can apply for a period of leave to remain after the UK leaves the EU to allow them to get up to the 5 year point and qualify for settled status at that point.

When do EEA nationals need to apply?
The documents says there is no need for EEA nationals to apply now for EEA documents, as their current rights will continue until the UK leaves the EU. However, the government will continue to process applications which are received. It is therefore only those EEA nationals who wish to apply to naturalise as British Citizens who will need to go through the process of applying for a document certifying permanent residence now.
The government have confirmed that there will be a ‘grace period’ for EEA nationals to make an application after the UK leaves the EEA. This is likely to be a period of 2 years. During this period of time EEA nationals will be ‘deemed’ to be granted leave to remain which means they will continue to be lawfully present in the UK. EEA nationals will need to make their application to regularise their position within this 2 year period to continue having a right to remain in the UK.
The grace period of 2 years is clearly a sensible measure given the impracticalities of the government having to process applications from approximately 3 million applicants simultaneously. The government have further confirmed that they will introduce the ability to apply under the new application procedure before the UK leaves the EU to enable EEA applicants who wish to apply at the earliest opportunity to make the application even before the UK leaves the EU.

What we do not know:
We have yet to be provided the following key information:
1) What the specified date is by which time EEA applicants will need to be in the UK to benefit from the proposals in the offer;

2) What new system of rules will apply to EEA nationals or their family members who arrive after the ‘specified date’;

3) What the fee for the new application procedure is – the document states this will be set at a ‘reasonable level’. The current fee for applications for indefinite leave to remain (which is the status that will be given to EEA nationals who qualify) is £2,297.00. This contrasts with the fee for making a permanent residence application under the EEA regulations of £65.00. Clearly the cost of making the application (given that there will be approximately 3 million people needing to apply) will be of considerable interest;

4) What documentary evidence of ‘residence’ will need to be provided as part of the new application procedures; and

5) Whether the UK will win on its negotiating position that it will be the UK domestic courts that are responsible for settling disputes over the rights of EEA nationals rather than the European Court of Justice.

Paragon Law have an experienced and established team of Immigration lawyers who specialise in providing advice to EEA nationals and their family members. We have also been regularly involved in providing training on the impact of Brexit to staff members at Universities and Employers. Please contact us if you require expert assistance in these areas.

In recent times, there have been many reports in the media about the possible implications of the outcome of the Brexit referendum and its potential impact on EEA nationals who are living in the UK. Uncertainty of the situation has caused many EEA nationals to scramble to make permanent residence applications before a potential “cut-off” date is announced. However, for those who may not yet have lived in the UK for long enough, or may have spent time in a UK prison, there is concern that they may be removable, potentially subject to deportation action, from the UK to their home countries, now that Article 50 has been triggered.

There are many uncertainties, including the rights of EEA nationals already present, and negotiations are about to take place between the Prime Minister, Theresa May, and the EU member states for a reciprocal agreement on the rights of free movement. The Cabinet Office on the 11th July 2016, indicated that EU nationals in the UK would continue to have the same rights as they held prior to the Brexit vote, by stating:

When we do leave the EU, we fully expect that the legal status of EU nationals living in the UK, and that of UK nationals in EU member states, will be properly protected. The government recognises and values the important contribution made by EU and other non-UK citizens who work, study and live in the UK.”

Of course, there will be EEA nationals living in the UK who do not fit within the criteria described by the Cabinet office, either because they have not secured work, or because they have concern over whether they meet the very strict criteria for immigration applications the Home Office has put in place.

Deportation is a word that has been widely publicized in the media and is a word that strikes fear into the hearts of those who may be seen to fit the criteria to invoke such action, but it is important to understand that enforcement action (such as being detained, and given a flight back to a person’s country of origin, and particularly deportation) will not be possible in many of these EEA cases.

When deportation can take place – EEA cases

Deportation mostly becomes applicable, but is not limited to, cases of criminality where EEA nationals are concerned. Deportation action not only removes a person from the UK but prevents a person from re-entering the UK for a minimum period of ten years under the current Immigration Rules. This is very different to an administrative removal, which simply seeks to expel a person who is not exercising the rights that they set out to gain entry for, or has abused those rights. Administrative removal can result in a re-entry ban of up to five years, but, again, this does not apply in all cases.

The Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 set out examples of why a deportation order might be made against an EEA national, at regulations 23 which states:

“(5) If the Secretary of State considers that the exclusion of the EEA national or the family member of an EEA national is justified on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health in accordance with regulation 27 the Secretary of State may make an order prohibiting that person from entering the United Kingdom.”

Therefore, if removal is not taking place for any of the reasons described, then it is potentially arguable that the action being taken is not lawful.

Legislative protection from deportation

One of the EEA Regulations describes what factors need to be taken into account when deciding EEA deportation cases. These are that:

  1. the decision must comply with the principle of proportionality;
  2. the decision must be based exclusively on the personal conduct of the person concerned;
  3. the personal conduct of the person must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society, taking into account past conduct of the person and that the threat does not need to be imminent;
  4. matters isolated from the particulars of the case or which relate to considerations of general prevention do not justify the decision;
  5. a person’s previous criminal convictions do not in themselves justify the decision;
  6. the decision may be taken on preventative grounds, even in the absence of a previous criminal conviction, provided the grounds are specific to the person.

It is important to be aware that it is not enough by itself that a crime has taken place and, in fact, if it can be shown that a person has been rehabilitated sufficiently by the prison and probation regimes in the UK, so that their future risk of re-offending is low, then the decision to deport them will not be proportionate.

In addition to the considerations that need to be taken before a decision to deport can be made, there are several levels of protection based on length of residence, which are shown later in the same set of Regulations. They are:

  1. If a person has accrued “permanent residence” (after 5 years of residence in the UK as a qualified person), then deportation action can only be taken on serious grounds of public policy and public security.
  2. If a person has accrued ten years residence in the UK as a qualified person then deportation action can only be taken on imperative grounds of public security.

These are very high thresholds to meet and may mean that deportation action cannot be taken at all.

The current situation

It seems from reports that have been carried out by various charitable organisations (Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID)) that the above criteria are not being properly examined by the Home Office before decisions are made in respect of EEA nationals.

A report compiled by the joint select committee report entitled “The human rights implications of Brexit 16 Dec 2016” sensibly concluded that “It is not realistic to imagine that the UK Government would be in a position to deport the large numbers of EU nationals currently in the United Kingdom. Under Article 8 of the ECHR, individuals are entitled for respect to their private and family life and home.” Therefore, those EEA nationals, who can demonstrate that they have strong family ties to the UK, in the form of partners or children, will not realistically, be easily removable. Those EEA nationals too, who have been living in the UK for a number of years, and can show that the centre of their lives is located here in the UK, either by work, or property, or simple length of residence, may also have good grounds to appeal against any decision made to deport them.

Shockingly though, it has been reported that the number of EU nationals detained in immigration centres has increased fivefold since the Conservatives came to power. In 2015, the last full year for which Home Office data is available, 3,699 EU citizens were detained under immigration powers, making up 11.4 per cent of all detainees. An investigation showed that, in many cases, no crime had been committed, with people detained for reasons such as losing their ID card or having a birthday party in a park. The detention of EU citizens has continued to rise rapidly, with 1,227 detained in the third quarter of 2016, making up 17 per cent of the total number recorded in that period.

Publically, the government want to be seen to be nurturing and protecting of EEA nationals present in the UK from what was, for all involved, a shock outcome of the Brexit referendum. As The Guardian reported on 1 December 2016 “a Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn’t be possible is if British citizens’ rights in European member states were not protected in return.” Amber Rudd sent a letter asking the House Of Lords not to vote against the government on their Brexit Bill in which she said that there was no question of treating European citizens with “anything other than the utmost respect.” Looking at the above statistics, it is hard to see how this could be the case.

In such times of political and legal uncertainty, and before any possible changes to the law and policy guidance, is important to take positive and affirmative action in cases concerning any EEA national at an early stage to prevent what could be devastating consequences.

Now that Article 50 has been triggered, the Home Office is very quiet regarding possible changes of policy, especially in light of the election result. Negotiations with the EU seem to be key to whether the Prime Minister will seek to protect the rights those EEA nationals already present in the UK or tighten what is already a tightly controlled immigration policy. It is difficult to see what this means in the future in terms of administrative removals, but deportation appeals are likely to remain very complex cases.

Anyone who receives notification of potential deportation proceedings should always seek assistance from a specialist immigration advisor. For those EEA nationals receiving such decisions, this is especially important, as many of these decisions are not in accordance with either the law or current published policy.

Our dedicated team of immigration lawyers have experienced in preventing such cases from proceeding to deportation and welcome enquiries from all EEA countries. Anyone requiring should assistance should not hesitate to contact us via email enquiries@paragonlaw.co.uk or telephone 0115 9644123.

Safe Return Reviews—Compliance but not compassion

 

Immigration analysis: Deirdre Sheahan, associate, and Decla Palmer, trainee, both at Paragon Law look at the

new ‘safe return’ review policy ushered in by the UK government. They explain that while the new policy is

technically compliant with the 1951 Refugee Convention (the Convention), it nonetheless demonstrates that the

UK does not intend to offer more than the minimum required by international standards.

To read this article in full please see the link here: Safe return reviews