Post
by Sibu » Mon May 16, 2016 12:12 am
The new trend in ILR tax issue refusal is that HO is using among other grounds Section 322 (5) for refusal rather than 322(1A), 322(2),322(2A), which specifically deals with deception when dealing with other government agencies.
Is this because HO understand deception ground will not work once applicant has amended the tax return.
Section 322 (5) states the following;
"When caseworkers consider it is undesirable to
let an applicant, applying for leave to remain, stay because of their character, behaviour or
associations or they are a threat to national security.
The main types of cases you need to consider for refusal under paragraph 322(5) or referral
to other teams are those that involve criminality, a threat to national security, war crimes or
travel bans.
A person does not need to have been convicted of a criminal offence for this provision to
apply. When deciding whether to refuse under this category, the key thing to consider is if
there is reliable evidence to support a decision that the person’s behaviour calls into
question their character and/or conduct and/or their associations to the extent that it is
undesirable to allow them to enter or remain in the UK. This may include cases where a
migrant has entered, attempted to enter or facilitated a sham marriage to evade immigration
control"
This seems very stretched and outrageous to classify people with error in their tax history to be either national security threat or intend to evade immigration control.
If someone been law abiding through out the entire stay in UK, which would be nearly 5 year for most tier 1 (general) applicants, paid their taxes and doing professional jobs; how can HO classify them under this category?
Any one who has/going JR route, how you solicitors approaching refusal ground? It seems silly to be that this ground is used in the first place. Looks like HO is treading on thin ice here.
