One Pump Court Chambers
3 Experts
2 Contributions by One Pump Court Chambers Experts
PRACTICE NOTES
This Practice Note examines the legal and practical outcomes of curtailing and cancelling permission to enter and remain, and their impact. It further summarises the avenues by which curtailment and cancellation may be contested.
Advisers should remain alert to the different bases on which curtailment and cancellation could be impugned (for example, for procedural unfairness), so they can shape advice wherever it appears such a step might be contemplated, in any given case and at an early stage.
See:
The scope of judicial review challenges to curtailment and cancellation.
In this Practice Note, the expressions ‘leave to enter/remain’ and ‘permission to enter/stay’ are used interchangeably.
Within the Immigration Rules for simplified routes, the word ‘permission’ has replaced ‘leave’, yet the earlier term continues in other categories of stay and in the relevant
Immigration
PRACTICE NOTES
This Practice Note was originally prepared by Dame Judith Farbey DBE. Amendments to immigration law can mean that a person applying for entry or leave under one rule or policy finds their application decided by reference to a different rule or policy. This Note outlines the principles the courts have employed when considering the impact of changes in law or policy on individual cases...
the presumption against the retrospective effect of legislation
the legal consequences of withdrawing a policy
the principle of legitimate expectation
These matters are nuanced. Advice to clients will frequently hinge on the specific facts rather than the automatic transposition of what the courts have stated in earlier decisions. The purpose of this Note is to lay a foundation for a general appreciation of certain legal principles...
The presumption against the retrospective effect of
Immigration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
