Back in December 2017, after a long drawn legal battle, we were successful in challenging the Home Office’s decision to curtail my client’s leave with immediate effect – without an in-country right of appeal. In a unanimous judgment by Lord Justices Underhill, Floyd and Irwin, it was decided that the appellants should have been granted an in-country right of appeal, in particular where they had made a human rights application.
Following on from there, my client Harwinder Kaur was granted an in-country right of appeal and the First Tier Tribunal without an ounce of doubt found that she had most certainly not cheated on the test and had obtained it genuinely. Whether the SSHD -would now agree to revisit its original curtailment decision of 2014 was any one’s guess. Certainly they ‘had to’ give the new factual matrix but practitioners in the mind field of Immigration law will affirm that the SSHD can take the most unusual positions on what could be very straightforward matters.
I am pleased to inform everyone that wisdom has prevailed in this instance and the SSHD has today informed my client that the Secretary of State, Sajid Javid, has rescinded the decision of September 2014 accepting that the original decision was flawed. It has further been accepted that my client and her dependants had continuous and lawful leave throughout this period.
This particular case is also a very good example of using linked in positively. Back in the day when we had been granted permission to appeal on this matter by the Court of Appeal, I had put up a post about it on linked in. It leads to Stephen Knafler QC messaging me about the case and consequently, I instructed him to lead the case at the Court of Appeal. The legal team on the matter was thereon strong as oak and smooth as silk.
The Jury’s still out on whether the finale to Game of Thrones will be to everyone’s pleasure. The finale to this saga, however, couldn’t have been better written.
Disclaimer:
The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position. Connaught Law and authors accept no responsibility for loss which may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog. For formal advice on the current law please don’t hesitate to contact Connaught Law. Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Connaught Law.
About the Author
