- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator
Please do not spread rumours without any facts. Guess because you are due for ILR based on the LRC you are finding rumour mongering as part of your 'anxiety'.iceman010899 wrote:Hello
There are rumours going around that the 10yr long residence rule will be taken off the immigration rules in April 2008. This is in line with the new points system. Every April they tend to look and modify immigration rules I guess.
Anyone else heard about this ?
An Act of Parliament is not needed to amend the Immigration Rules. I am open to correction but the government can change the Immigration Rules any time they like so long as it is within the authority given by the Immigration Act 1971.jes2jes wrote:
The LRC is now enshrined in the Immigration Rules and therefore if I am not crazy cannot just be repealed without a Judicial Review or an Act of Parliament (Am I taking it too far?).
Thanks for this and that is the reason why I put in brackets whether I was taking it too far because I was not sureJAJ wrote:An Act of Parliament is not needed to amend the Immigration Rules. I am open to correction but the government can change the Immigration Rules any time they like so long as it is within the authority given by the Immigration Act 1971.jes2jes wrote:
The LRC is now enshrined in the Immigration Rules and therefore if I am not crazy cannot just be repealed without a Judicial Review or an Act of Parliament (Am I taking it too far?).
You aren't crazy, but you aren't right either!jes2jes wrote:
The LRC is now enshrined in the Immigration Rules and therefore if I am not crazy cannot just be repealed without a Judicial Review or an Act of Parliament (Am I taking it too far?).
Thanks Amanda for letting me know I am saneavjones wrote:You aren't crazy, but you aren't right either!jes2jes wrote:
The LRC is now enshrined in the Immigration Rules and therefore if I am not crazy cannot just be repealed without a Judicial Review or an Act of Parliament (Am I taking it too far?).
The Immigration Rules are a statutory instrument, and are delegated legislation. The Home Secretary can indeed change them, under the Act, subject to proper procedures etc. There is no need for further primary legislation.
As an example, the Special Voucher Holder rules were deleted a few years ago.
A judicial review has nothing to do with legislative changes either. This is an action which can be brought against a public decision-maker, on the grounds that the decision is ultra vires (outside the maker's power) proceedurally unfair, or Wednesbury unreasonable.
I've never studied any business or commercial law, so don't ask me about any of thatjes2jes wrote: Guess I missed the terminologies trying to flex the little terms in my head I learnt during my brush with 'Business Law' in Uni. Funny enough, I am interested in the Law and God being so good, I might study for the bar when I hit forty years and have retired after a successful career path so that I can relax and help the needy and the disadvantaged in society with my knowledge
Well, that is a nice list of legal stuff you have under your belt 'girl'. The only stuff on your list I came across in BL are Contract, Tort, English Legal System and a little Criminal Law but that was quite some time ago (mern! I am getting old).avjones wrote:I've never studied any business or commercial law, so don't ask me about any of thatjes2jes wrote: Guess I missed the terminologies trying to flex the little terms in my head I learnt during my brush with 'Business Law' in Uni. Funny enough, I am interested in the Law and God being so good, I might study for the bar when I hit forty years and have retired after a successful career path so that I can relax and help the needy and the disadvantaged in society with my knowledge
I did a standard LLB, which meant I studied the compulsary elements of tort, contract, English legal system, trusts, property, crime, and European law. My university (UCL) made us all study jurisprudence as well, and my options were evidence law, media law, contempt of court, and history of English law. I did an LLM at UCL as well, the history of Western European law, administrative law, international human rights, and international criminal law. SO if you come across any dark ages Englishmen, or Visigoths, who need legal help, I'm your girl!
I now do mostly immigration law (a lot of it is High Court, and Court of Appeal) and immigration-related crime.
How can you have forgotten? It's the snail in the ginger beer case!Wanderer wrote: And Donahue vs Stevens! I've totally forgotten what that was about.
Yes they are delegated legislation, but no they are not a statutory instrument, and the Home Office when asked refused to put them in the form of a SI.The Immigration Rules are a statutory instrument, and are delegated legislation.
-: something that those fighting the more recent change for WP, HSMP etc holders hit by the change from 4 years to 5 years .... might like to look more closely at!Changes to the rules cannot apply retrospectively, and the date from which they take effect is always shown on the statement of changes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlill_v. ... ll_CompanyVictoriaS wrote:I'm going to have nightmares about Carbolic Soap now....
Victoria, I don't see how that is relevant. As from 01.04.03 spouse visas started to be issued for 2 years as against one year previously. And as from 01.04.03 the Immigration Rules stated that ILR could be applied for after 2 years ... by holders of spouse visas.But John, the point about the date is that that date is always the date of consideration, not the date of application.