Free Movement

Updates and commentary on immigration and asylum law

Supreme Court allows 3rd party support

Charles_DickensNews just in, more to follow tomorrow, if there’s anything to say. AM (Somalia) was heard and allowed today. I’m currently at the Hammersmith and Fulham Community Law Centre AGM so not much chance to deal with this properly right now. Word is that the Supreme Court has overturned the Court of Appeal and tribunal and third party support is once again allowed under the immigration rules for spouses and dependent relatives. The written judgment will probably not be available for several weeks or months, unfortunately.

In short, this means that support from benevolent uncles is once more permitted as a contribution to maintenance under the immigration rules. Charles Dickens would approve, I feel.

UPDATE 12/11/09: I had a chat with one of the juniors in the case. The panel was of five judges. The appellant’s leaders were Manjit Gill QC, Michael Fordham QC (I’ve noticed he doesn’t do a lot of Treasury work these days) and David Panick QC, with Monica Carss-Frisk QC for the Home Office. The hearing lasted two and a half days. At the end the panel announced that the appeal was allowed and entry clearance should be granted. Intriguingly they also indicated that they were going to hold that third party support was permissible for the three categories under the rules. It isn’t clear which three, but must include spouses and dependent relatives. Children cases may also be included in the ruling.

Filed under: Cases, Tribunal overturned again

One Response

  1. [...] Disclaimer The information and commentary on the law on this web site is provided free of charge for information purposes only. Every reasonable effort is made to make the information and commentary accurate and up to date at the date each item is published, but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by the author. The information and commentary does not, and is not intended to, amount to legal advice to any person on a specific case or matter. You are strongly advised to obtain specific, personal advice from a lawyer about your case or matter and not to rely on the information or comments on this site. « Supreme Court allows 3rd party support [...]

Leave a Reply

Comments

Please do not ask for legal advice or advice on your individual case by leaving comments. Any such comments will be deleted and will not receive replies. At the top of the page there is advice available on the law and on finding a lawyer. Other comments are very welcome!



Annual Judicial Review Conference

11 December 2009, 10am to 5pm, Landmark Chambers, 6 CPD

Richard Drabble QC as chair
David Jones of Garden Court on fresh claims
Sheona York of IAS on running test cases
James Packer of Duncan Lewis on funding and costs
Tim Buley of Landmark on detention
Mark Henderson of Doughty Street on the relationship between the Admin Court and Treasury Solicitors
Mark Symes of Garden Court on 3rd country removals
Colin Yeo of Renaissance Chambers on transfer of judicial review to the tribunal

Places limited so book now

Free Movement archives

Disclaimer

The information and commentary on the law on this web site is provided free of charge for information purposes only. Every reasonable effort is made to make the information and commentary accurate and up to date at the date each item is published, but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by the author. The information and commentary does not, and is not intended to, amount to legal advice to any person on a specific case or matter. You are strongly advised to obtain specific, personal advice from a lawyer about your case or matter and not to rely on the information or comments on this site.