Unlawful Immigration Curfews Under Government Review
The Home Office has been forced to review curfews imposed on people after they leave immigration detention centres, a BBC investigation has found. It comes after the Court of Appeal ruled in May that it had imposed the curfews unlawfully. The law firm that took the Home Office to court says potentially thousands of people may be entitled to compensation. Those subject to curfews cannot leave their home for up to 12 hours at a time. The curfews are not directly linked to time served in prison, but some immigration detainees have committed a crime. Others have overstayed their visas or are seeking asylum. Lisa Matthews, from human rights organisation Right To Remain, told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme that immigration curfews are "highly damaging" to people's lives. "The policy was unjustifiable, unnecessary, punitive and unlawful. We believe that if the Home Office believes it is above the law, this is a danger for us all."
Read more: Catrin Nye, BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37787007
MK, IK (a child by his litigation friend MK) Judicial Review Granted
Judicial Review Decision Notice
Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber
The Queen on the application of MK, IK (a child by his litigation friend MK) and HK (a child by her litigation friend MK)
Applicants V Secretary of State for the Home Department Respondent
Before The Honourable Mr Justice McCloskey, President and Upper Tribunal Judge Peter Lane
Application for judicial review: substantive decision
Having considered all documents lodged and having heard the parties’ respective representatives, Ms C Kilroy and Ms M Knorr, both of counsel, instructed by Bhatt Murphy Solicitors, on behalf of the Applicants and Mr B Keith, of counsel, instructed by the Government Legal Department, on behalf of the Respondent at a hearing at Field House, London on 21 April 2016.
Decision: The Applicants are granted permission to apply for judicial review, the application for judicial review succeeds and the Applicants are granted relief in the terms set forth in  of this judgment
Download the full judgment: http://www.refworld.org/docid/582096654.html
Tier 2 UK Immigration Rules - Are You Ready for the Changes?
New decisions and changes in Immigration Law show no signs of slowing down. Within the field of Immigration, we have been hit by staggering increases in Immigration tribunal fees, the landmark High Court ruling regarding Article 50 and detention curfews imposed by the Home Office being deemed unlawful. A new statement of changes was issued on Friday 4th November 2016 confirming upcoming changes within the Immigration Rules which will be coming into force as early as 23rd November 2016. Whilst there are many changes being introduced, some will have more impact than others. Within this article, I intend to focus on highlighting the upcoming changes for companies who currently employ or intend to employ overseas workers. Some key changes that will be implemented in November 2016 as well as in April 2017 are:
Read more: Shyam Dhir, Duncan Lewis, http://tinyurl.com/hbvklym
Statelessness and Applications for Leave to Remain
A best practice guide, Dr Sarah Woodhouse and Judith Carter, ILPA and University of Liverpool Law Clinic, 3 November 2016. This guide sets out the current view of the authors about best practice in advising and representing clients considering or making an application for statelessness leave in the UK.
Who is this guide for? The topic is relevant to all practitioners: cases of stateless persons may crop up in any area of immigration, asylum and nationality practice and it is vital to know what to do. The guide may also be of use to organisations working with potentially stateless persons who may refer them to legal advisers.
What does this guide do? This guide provides advice on representing clients considering whether and when to make an application for leave to remain as a stateless person. It is designed to help you to identify potentially stateless persons from your caseload, to advise them about making an application, to prepare a well-evidenced application supported by legal argument and to challenge any refusal.
Who is ‘stateless’? A ‘stateless person’ is defined in the 1954 Convention as ‘a person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law.’ The number of stateless persons is estimated to be over 15 million globally, with especially large numbers originating from and living in South East Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East (Palestinians in particular). Many European countries have ‘indigenous’ stateless populations: for example ethnic Russians in Estonia and Latvia, and Roma living in Eastern European countries. There are also large stateless populations throughout the world arising from, for example, State succession, conflict between States and civil war, gaps in and conflict between nationality laws, disappearance of State territory, for example through climate change, and discriminatory laws and State practice. Well-known examples of communities where statelessness is prevalent are the Roma, Palestinian, Kuwaiti Bidoon, Rohingya and Saharawi peoples.
Read more: http://tinyurl.com/h8zgdmt
Plan for Immigration Removal Centre at Glasgow Airport Rejected
The UK Home Office wants to build a 51-bed "short-term holding facility" on Abbotsinch Road to house those awaiting removal from the country. It follows the announcement in September that the controversial Dungavel removal centre in Lanarkshire is to close in 2017. The plans for the new centre were rejected by Renfrewshire Council. Councillors said the new building, which was planned for construction on the site of a former British Airways social club, would be "detrimental to the economic development of the Glasgow Airport Investment Area". The holding centre was to feature 20 bedrooms and ancillary accommodation over two floors. The plans said the building would have to be "robust in order to hold and safeguard individuals detained by Home Office Immigration enforcement". The Home Office said the "vast majority" of stays there would be for less than a week. The decision to reject the holding centre was made by Renfrewshire Council's planning and property policy board.
Read more: BBC News, http://tinyurl.com/pdkrt8y