- 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
i heared fromrv wrote:Hello everyone,
I got my rejection last week and visa is due to expire next week therefore i didn't get right of appeal.
Do you think that i should go for higher tribunal. I haven't seen anyone getting visa in higher tribunal and it is too expensive.
Regards
RV
malik5805 wrote:i heared fromrv wrote:Hello everyone,
I got my rejection last week and visa is due to expire next week therefore i didn't get right of appeal.
Do you think that i should go for higher tribunal. I haven't seen anyone getting visa in higher tribunal and it is too expensive.
Regards
RV
someone but not seen anyone personally but ppl saying that if anyone go for judicial review HO try to do outside court settlement and issue visas and i think
you shud go for Review::
http://www.duncanlewis.co.uk/immigratio ... 09%29.htmlamran wrote:DO anybody knows any lawyer to represent cases on no-win-no fee basis. money is matter because some lawyer asking fees in advance but their knowledge is less them this forum's member. we will pay fees but looking for little bit certainty that we will get psw at the end of the road.
please some advice people for shake of humanity and future inconveniences.
I know these are previous cases but the only thing u need is either a good lawyer or a good representation . They are not relying on Policy Guidance refusals as they have been told by supreme court judges in ALVI JUDGEMENT . My whole point of sharing this appeal over here was to give you good points on which you can defend yourself in the court for eg UKBA and my other respected freinds have been saying this on and on that ACCA is not a recognised body but yesterday i went on to study whole ACCA constitution where it said it was recognised as a qualifiying body in 1993 so if somebody dont know about something it does not mean it did not exist .amran wrote:noman83
thank you for your kind support. unfortunately that information is out of date becasue it was 2009, there after policy change and rules also change in 2010 and last year many student went on appeal at upper tribunal . Gure Greene, and other member provided many link of cases, I did not see any case represented was allowed in upper tribunal.
this time they are refusing cases on Appendix A and B not on policy guidance. it seems much tough than before. one things surprise me that the link you attached they did not update their information since 2009 does it means that no other cases were able to get positive decision.
I do not wish to judge any body just sharing my personal opinion. im still waiting for my reply from ukba.
Are they willing to get cases no win -no fee basis , psw fundamental level ?
Operational word here is equivalent. Old rules allowed equivalent qualification. Recent rules required strict qualification.Noman83 wrote:I know these are previous cases but the only thing u need is either a good lawyer or a good representation . They are not relying on Policy Guidance refusals as they have been told by supreme court judges in ALVI JUDGEMENT . My whole point of sharing this appeal over here was to give you good points on which you can defend yourself in the court for eg UKBA and my other respected freinds have been saying this on and on that ACCA is not a recognised body but yesterday i went on to study whole ACCA constitution where it said it was recognised as a qualifiying body in 1993 so if somebody dont know about something it does not mean it did not exist .amran wrote:noman83
thank you for your kind support. unfortunately that information is out of date becasue it was 2009, there after policy change and rules also change in 2010 and last year many student went on appeal at upper tribunal . Gure Greene, and other member provided many link of cases, I did not see any case represented was allowed in upper tribunal.
this time they are refusing cases on Appendix A and B not on policy guidance. it seems much tough than before. one things surprise me that the link you attached they did not update their information since 2009 does it means that no other cases were able to get positive decision.
I do not wish to judge any body just sharing my personal opinion. im still waiting for my reply from ukba.
Are they willing to get cases no win -no fee basis , psw fundamental level ?
This point of recognition is also mentioned in this appeal :
Decision :
The Tribunal stated that the new and old guidance ( pre 31st March 2009) seemed to mirror each other and the main concern was “professional and vocational” qualifications being considered in the same category.
The Tribunal considered the issue of whether professional and vocational qualifications were different in nature and concluded that vocational courses especially at NVQ level involve little academic study whereas the Appellant according to ACCA literature had achieved a level of Bachelors when he passed his Part Two exams and then onto the equivalent of a Master’s degree when he completed his Professional qualification.
The Tribunal found that the literature and further documentation from the ACCA body was authoritative evidence concerning the equivalency of the course studied by the Appellant. The Tribunal held that in light of this evidence the Appellant had obtained a qualification which was equivalent to a Master’s degree level. As the ACCA was recognised as a qualifying body in 1993 and the Appellant had obtained the qualification at a recognised institution, the Tribunal was satisfied that the Appellant was entitled to a grant of further leave as a Tier 1 (Post – Study Work) Migrant and the appeal was allowed.
And for equivalency level obiviously judges had to take in coinsideration documents provided by ACCA on thier equivalency . In short it depends on you and your lawyer how well they have prepared for the case . Outcome could be you loose or you win but take decision yourself dont rely on my or somebody else interpretation .
Thanks but then what does level means as it says in the appendix we are refering to ? One intresting piece of information my freind has been offered admission in MBA PROGRAM by 2 reputed uni on sole basis of ACCA FUNDAMENTALS ??? what explanation do we have for this ???quantum1 wrote:Operational word here is equivalent. Old rules allowed equivalent qualification. Recent rules required strict qualification.Noman83 wrote:I know these are previous cases but the only thing u need is either a good lawyer or a good representation . They are not relying on Policy Guidance refusals as they have been told by supreme court judges in ALVI JUDGEMENT . My whole point of sharing this appeal over here was to give you good points on which you can defend yourself in the court for eg UKBA and my other respected freinds have been saying this on and on that ACCA is not a recognised body but yesterday i went on to study whole ACCA constitution where it said it was recognised as a qualifiying body in 1993 so if somebody dont know about something it does not mean it did not exist .amran wrote:noman83
thank you for your kind support. unfortunately that information is out of date becasue it was 2009, there after policy change and rules also change in 2010 and last year many student went on appeal at upper tribunal . Gure Greene, and other member provided many link of cases, I did not see any case represented was allowed in upper tribunal.
this time they are refusing cases on Appendix A and B not on policy guidance. it seems much tough than before. one things surprise me that the link you attached they did not update their information since 2009 does it means that no other cases were able to get positive decision.
I do not wish to judge any body just sharing my personal opinion. im still waiting for my reply from ukba.
Are they willing to get cases no win -no fee basis , psw fundamental level ?
This point of recognition is also mentioned in this appeal :
Decision :
The Tribunal stated that the new and old guidance ( pre 31st March 2009) seemed to mirror each other and the main concern was “professional and vocational” qualifications being considered in the same category.
The Tribunal considered the issue of whether professional and vocational qualifications were different in nature and concluded that vocational courses especially at NVQ level involve little academic study whereas the Appellant according to ACCA literature had achieved a level of Bachelors when he passed his Part Two exams and then onto the equivalent of a Master’s degree when he completed his Professional qualification.
The Tribunal found that the literature and further documentation from the ACCA body was authoritative evidence concerning the equivalency of the course studied by the Appellant. The Tribunal held that in light of this evidence the Appellant had obtained a qualification which was equivalent to a Master’s degree level. As the ACCA was recognised as a qualifying body in 1993 and the Appellant had obtained the qualification at a recognised institution, the Tribunal was satisfied that the Appellant was entitled to a grant of further leave as a Tier 1 (Post – Study Work) Migrant and the appeal was allowed.
And for equivalency level obiviously judges had to take in coinsideration documents provided by ACCA on thier equivalency . In short it depends on you and your lawyer how well they have prepared for the case . Outcome could be you loose or you win but take decision yourself dont rely on my or somebody else interpretation .
Yes i have all the paperwork uk naric Acca letters etc and am going for JR not appeal so have a v good Barrister as well who is a family freind as wellNAHID wrote:Noman83
it will depend on tribunal, what they will decide based on refusal. do you have evidence to met the Appendix A requirements except UKNARIC.
hisham786 wrote:Its a long shot..but I have heard rumours that PSW was granted for ACCA in High Court judicial review. Not hearing but judicial review.
Is it possible for anyone to check it up with their lawyers and barrister.
Also anyone appealing in Upper Tribunal please contact me as I am in the same boat