Assisting our immigration firms can open up the world

An article in the Irish Independent from Thursday, 30^th August, discusses the changing demographic profile in Ireland. Numerous economic and political debates have included the discussion about the “new multi-racial Ireland,” including the potential for “non-Irish nationals to bolster business activity.”

Currently, foreign nationals constitute eleven percent of the nation’s population, and much of this sector is comprised of young, bright college graduates that are eager to begin their own job. The article reports that they have, “on average, progressed to higher levels of education than the Irish population as a whole . . . statistically they are more likely to start their own business. We therefore have within our population a very large group of people who are young, well educated, highly entrepreneurial, and with established networks in foreign countries, but still we do not recognise them as an asset and a wonderful opportunity to expand our international trade.”

Immigrants are valuable trading partners in business because they bring a fresh perspective on the work, as well as new and innovative methodologies and ideas. However, the article admits that issues with language, religion, age, and gender have caused conflicts and difficulties for immigrants attempting to integrate into Irish society and begin working. Not only that, but the very nature of their non-Irish status also presents its own obstacles, which include “a lack of business contracts,  greater difficulty in accessing finance from institutional sources, and an information deficit when it comes to negotiating business regulatory and legal environments.”

The article concludes with recommendations. “What is required in Ireland is targeted intervention promoted through the social networks and media channels favoured by immigrants.” This way, the challenges that are faced by immigrant entrepreneurs can be met and properly faced, so that they may have an easier time establishing their own business and integrating into Irish life. “At a time when Ireland is seeking to build its international trade across the globe, it appears that we have a wonderful resource on our doorstep that is not being proactively utilised.”

Brophy Solicitors

31.08.12

http://www.independent.ie/business/small-business/assisting-our-immigrant-firms-can-open-up-the-world-3214901.html

Language school granted interim injunction against watchdog

An article in the Irish Times from Tuesday, 21^st August 2012 reports that a language school in County Wicklow has been granted “a temporary injunction restraining the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland (NQAI) from striking it off a register of recognised language colleges.” If the college were to lose official accreditation as a language school, there would be severe consequences for incoming students, who could have their visas rendered invalid. To prevent this from happening, Judge McDermott granted an injunction until August 30^th. The NQAI has to review the late completion and implementation of a development plan for the school, to see if it will withdraw recognition or not.

Brophy Solicitors

30.08.12

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0821/1224322586164.html

The right to reside for the non-EEA parent of an EU Child

We are working on a number of applications for residence permission for the  non EEEA parent of an EU child resident in the State.

In one particular case, our client is the father and the sole carer of his EU citizen child since the mother returned to home country,  having previously been employed in Ireland.
We submitted an application to the Minister asserting that our client  acquired a derivative right of residence based on his child’s rights under Article 20 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU, relying particularly on the Chen judgment, (as the father was working and financially self sufficient while in employment), and also on the case of LB Harrow v Ibrahim C‑310/08 and Teixeira v London Borough of Lambeth and Secretary of State C-480-08, where the European Court of Justice found that, following Case C‑413/99 Baumbast and R [2002] ECR I‑7091, a union child’s right to reside and enter education was independent of that child’s parents status, regardless of whether the parent who is a citizen of the union or not, or has ceased to be a migrant worker in the host state. The child’s rights derived directly from the Treaty. A refusal to allow the primary carer parent to reside during the children’s education would deprive the children of their Treaty rights.

On sufficient resources, the Court of Justice indicated as follows;

“in circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, the children of a national of a Member State who works or has worked in the host Member State and the parent who is their primary carer can claim a right of residence in the latter State on the sole basis of Article 12 of Regulation No 1612/68, without such a right being conditional on their having sufficient resources and comprehensive sickness insurance cover in that State.”

The UK position is that Ibrahim and Teixeira parents in the UK are fully entitled to work.  Under the Social Security (Persons from Abroad) Amendment Regulations 2006, they also have a 'right to reside' for the purpose of claiming benefits.   The right to reside based on the Ibrahim/Teixeira cases is now enshrined in the new Immigration (European Economic Area) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 and is not subject to any conditions such as an inability to work or claim benefits.

The Department of Justice have taken a different approach. In the above mentioned case, it has been determined that the Ibrahim and Teixeira cases do apply to our client’s situation and that a right of residence has been established. However, the Minister has granted our client a restricted stamp 3 residence permission (usually issued to dependents), which prohibits our client from working or accessing welfare. As a result, he has lost his job, and is now unable to support himself and his son, and instructs he will have no option but to return to Pakistan with his son.

We believe that the prohibition against work/access to welfare for the sole carer of an EU child who is established in the education systym is at odds with the Ibrahim and Teixera cases, ( both applicants in those cases were welfare dependent), and therefore in breach of EU law. We will keep you updated on developments in this area of EU Free Movement law.

Brophy Solicitors

28.08.12

New Laws to Tackle rise in Marriages of Convenience

An article in the Irish Independent on Monday, 27^th August discusses the new laws that are designed to crack down on sham marriages. Immigration officials have seen a rise in sham marriages, where a non-EU national marries an EU national for the sole purpose of gaining residency. The article reports, “Sums of at least €2,000 are being paid to Eastern European women to take part and in some cases gardai have found payments of up to €10,000.” After the non-EU national has gained a permanent form of residency, the marriage is dissolved. An analysis of the immigration figures have revealed that a disproportionate number of sham marriages occur between Pakistanis and partners from Baltic states, specifically Latvia. “One-third of the 1,617 applicants last year were to marry a Latvian or Lithuanian national.” The gardai have found no evidence that these women were the victims of trafficking.

The issue has been raised by UK Home Secretary Theresa May, and Minister for Justice Alan Shatter, as well as discussed at EU Justice and Home Affairs meetings. The gardai blocked 150 marriages that they believed to be fraudulent, but the High Court in Dublin ruled that they had no authorization for such an arrest. Legislation is currently being drafted to tighten the restrictions and prevent this abuse of residency rights. 

Brophy Solicitors

27.08.12

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/new-laws-to-tackle-rise-in-marriages-of-convenience-3210488.html

Article from UK’s “Asylum Aid” Quarterly report: The Director’s Note

Minister Damian Green has revealed plans to reform the UK’s asylum system, specifically regarding the “culture of disbelief.” Frequently, claims of asylum are denied because the interviewers question the applicant’s credibility, or believe they are outright lying about the treatment they received in their country of origin. This objectivity and bias leads to many poor decisions, reports author Maurice Wren. Asylum Aid, the UK-based asylum assistance organization, is committed to providing quality legal advice to vulnerable asylum-seekers, helping them overcome bureaucratic hurdles and the “culture of disbelief.” Wren calls on the Home Office to show leadership in this matter.

Brophy Solicitors

24.08.12

http://www.asylumaid.org.uk/data/files/publications/194/AA_NewsletterSummer_2012WEB.pdf

Flexible visa procedures put search for talent first

An article in the Irish Times from Thursday, 23 August discusses the need for flexible visa procedures for non-EU researchers to enter the state. One of the main issues regarding immigration is the concern that foreign nationals will overtake the job market, leaving Irish citizens without work, or that they will become a burden on society, however, this isn’t a concern regarding researchers. Ireland welcomes foreign researchers, believing that they can only benefit the state by bringing their expertise and experience over. Countries will frequently set immigration barriers to prevent non-EU workers from overcrowding the job market, but it is important that researchers are able to easily obtain a visa.

In 1998, France was the first country to pioneer the Scientific Visa, where non-EU researchers could enter the state and work without needing to apply for a work permit, as well as obtaining the right to have family members join them immediately. This attracted a number of researchers into the State. Then, in 2005, the European Third Country Directive mandated that Member States within the Schengen zone adopt the French model. Once a researcher lawfully enters a Schengen area, they can move freely throughout the area. Ireland is not a Schengen country, but the government has signed on to the directive. The article reports that “The scheme targets non-EU researchers employed by the Irish higher education and public research sector as well as companies involved in research, development and innovation.” The Hosting Agreement, in conjunction with the scheme, provides that the researcher has the same rights as a Green Card holder.

The article concludes, “Given the global competition for talent, it is essential to have schemes like the Hosting Agreement in place so we can continue to attract researchers to Ireland.”

Brophy Solicitors

24.08.12

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sciencetoday/2012/0823/1224322752237.html

PILA Bulletin: Deportation not incompatible with right to family life

The latest PILA bulletin discusses the recent decision on the case of Sivsivadze v Minister for Justice. The High Court held that the Minister’s power to deport individuals is “not incompatible with rights to family life or marriage enshrined in the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case regarded the sections of the Immigration Act of 1999 that dealt with the Minister’s power to deport individuals. The applicant’s argue that these sections, section 3(1) and 3(11), were “invalid having regard to the provisions of the Constitution.” Expulsion from the state is indefinite, perhaps lifelong, and the applicants argued that such a sentence is disproportionate.

The Judge in the case must be assessed under the proportionality test laid out in the case of Heaney v Ireland. The PILA article states that “the three-pronged test says that restrictions to rights are permitted by the Constitution where such restrictions are (1) rationally connected to the objective and not arbitrary, unfair or based on irrational considerations, (2) they impair the right as little as possible and (3) they are such that their effects on rights are proportional to the objective.” Justice Kearns P held that the sections of the Immigration Act passed the test of proportionality, and that the constitutional test must fail.

Brophy Solicitors

24.08.12

http://www.pila.ie/bulletin/august-2012/22-august-2012/irish-immigration-updates-deportation-not-incompatible-with-right-to-family-life-bullying-of-migrant-children/

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/443e02fda11f041780257a3700377087?OpenDocument

BURDENSOME PROCESS FOR REGISTRATION OF ZAMBRANO CASES

We recently posted about a family residing in Saudi Arabia who was granted permission to enter and reside in the State on the basis of their Irish Citizen Child.  On appeal of their first application which was refused for a number of reasons, we challenged the deciding officer for failing to consider the rights of the European Citizen Child in line with the judgement in Zambrano.  Ultimately the family was granted D Type visas to enter the State.  Upon their arrival, immigration officials at Dublin Airport provided the family which consists of a mother, father and three young children with a one month permission to remain.  The family was directed to register their status with the Minister for Justice and Equality and this was done almost immediately through our office.  

The family have commenced life in their new home.  They found accommodation and the children have been enrolled for the 2012/2013 school year.  The father, who is highly qualified in his chosen field, has been provided with the opportunity to work.  He is unable to do so at present without providing evidence of a Stamp 4.  He is also aware of the fact that the delay in the determination of so called ‘Zambrano’ type cases is considerable. 

We understand that there are two systems in place regarding D Type Visas – i.e. the pre-clearance visa is granted which is followed by the requirement of registering your permission to remain in the State by obtaining the appropriate Stamp on one’s passport and a ‘GNIB card.’  We informed the State that we are aware of two cases based on ‘Zambrano’ pending for over 12 months from this office alone. The INIS website states that ‘legally resident non EEA nationals who have entered the State with the intention of residing for more than three months must register with their local immigration registration officers.’   It seems that our clients, like many others such applicants, are subject to further examination after having been granted a long –stay visa.  They have been requested to make an application to the Zambrano Team in the Department of Justice and Equality which could take up to a year or more to decide.  Again, they must submit all of the documentation already forwarded to visa officials twice.  We were also advised that a temporary Stamp 4 while their application is pending is out of the question.  

The INIS website also provides that ‘the onus is on all Non EEA nationals to keep their residency up to date at all times while they are in the State.’  It is infuriating that our clients and similar families would leave their homes and jobs to relocate to Ireland. They make preparations to continue family life in Ireland based on having obtained long-stay visas to enter the State only to find that in fact they cannot avail of employment and are liable to become undocumented for a long period of time.  The State advised us that unfortunately it is the case that a person’s permission might expire during the determination of an application for residency but nothing can be done about this.  We believe that this is a very serious problem. It is unfair that a country would facilitate a person with a long- stay visa to enter the State only to allow that person to endure a painstaking wait to actually register permission to remain. 

If the State continues to operate in this manner, it should at least allow for temporary permission to issue to those who are lawfully resident in the State and risk becoming undocumented while the Minister decides their application.  The UK Home Office have operated such a system for all Zambrano applicants since the judgement itself was delivered.

We would ask the Minister what is the point of carrying our a full assessment of the Irish citizen child’s rights of residence  from outside the State, when on arrival, the full assessment must be carried out again? If the family visa are granted to enter the State,  why are the child’s  parents,  granted a temporary permission to stay as visitors for one month only,  when the residence application may take over one year to determine? How is this family supposed to support the child in the intervening period? Without lawful permission to reside, applicants become vulnerable, restricted in their proper enjoyment of family life and risk huge financial problems.  Zambrano cases are child focused but yet the Department of Justice’s policy is wholly adverse to the best interest of that child.  

Brophy Solicitors

24.08.12

NEW 2 YEAR EXTENSION FOR STUDENTS RESIDING HERE SINCE 2004

The Department of Justice & Equality has announced new arrangements for students who have been continuously resident in the State since before 1 January 2005 (i.e. the student must have received a GNIB card during or before 2004 and for each year thereafter). These new arrangements will allow eligible students to reside in Ireland for a further period of 2 years on specified conditions. In addition, at the conclusion of the two year probationary period those students will be eligible to apply for a more permanent status on condition that certain obligations have been fulfilled.

Any non-EEA national student who first registered their residence in Ireland as student on or before 31 December 2004 and who commenced their studies in Ireland on or before 31 December 2004 may apply for the special probationary extension.

Non-EEA Students who are no longer resident in the State will not be eligible to avail of this student probationary extension.

In order for such a student to be granted the extension they must have maintained their residence as a student from first registration until the date of application for the Student Probationary Extension. Any student not currently registered and with a significant gap in registration will not be eligible to apply for the extension.

Students must also furnish one P60 certificate that has been acquired within the previous three years.

The following residency conditions will apply to the probationary period –

·        The eligible student will not be required to be registered or enrolled in an academic course of study.

·        The eligible student will be permitted to work for a maximum period of 40 hours per week without being required to hold a work permit.

·        The eligible student will be required to maintain private medical insurance.

·        The eligible student will be required to reside in the State without drawing on publicly funded social assistance programmes (e.g. supplementary welfare allowances, medical card, jobseeker supports etc.)

·        The eligible student will not be permitted to apply for reunification with family members who are resident outside the State.

·        The eligible student must be of good character and must demonstrate that they are law abiding.

At the conclusion of the two year probationary period the eligible students can apply for a Stamp 4 permission to reside in the State.

Brophy Solicitors welcomes these new arrangements and is available to assist potential applicants with any queries they may have regarding the scheme. 

Brophy Solicitors

24.08.12

Coalition Welcomes New INIS Guidelines for Immigrants Experiencing Domestic Violence

The Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) has commented on the new Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS) guidelines for immigrants that are victims of domestic abuse, specifically if the right to reside in Ireland is dependent on the abuser. The guidelines contain information on how to “obtain immigration status independent of their relationship with the perpetrator.” These guidelines are important for someone who is here on a family visa, or because of EU Treaty Rights, where their permission to reside is dependent on their partner’s immigration status, their citizenship of the EU, or their status as a worker. The person suffering the abuse might be frightened to seek a safer situation, and leave the abusive relationship, because they might be afraid that their permission to stay will be revoked. The majority of those affected are women, and these women should know that they have clear options for staying in the state while leaving the abusive relationship.

The INIS report is “aimed at explaining how a victim of domestic violence whose relationship has broken down can apply for independent immigration permission in his/her own right.” The guidelines then specifically define domestic violence, and then clearly state that “you do not have to remain in an abusive relationship in order to preserve your entitlement to remain in Ireland.” Applications must be made from within the state, and the applicant must have a current, valid immigration status. In the application, the applicant must state out the circumstances of the abuse, whether or not the family home has been broken up, and any supporting evidence possible, including a Protection Order from the Courts, a Garda report, and medical records. Generally, the applicant will retain the same immigration status they held previously, a stamp 3. However, stamp 3 does not enable a person to work, so if it becomes necessary for the applicant to work to provide for herself and any dependent family members, special consideration will be given.

Brian Killoran, of the ICI, has called for INIS to ensure that these women will be granted unrestricted access to the labour market and emergency support. There are a few other issues with the guidelines, as it is not clear exactly what status will be given, since the applicant is no longer dependent on their abusive partner. However, the guidelines do contain helpful information for victims of domestic violence. They are in an extremely vulnerable position, and it is crucial for them to be aware of the fact that they can leave their abusive relationship and still retain permission to reside in Ireland.

Brophy Solicitors            

23.08.12

http://www.immigrantcouncil.ie/media/press-releases/569-coalition-welcomes-new-inis-guidelines-for-immigrants-experiencing-domestic-violence

Special vulnerabilities of asylum seeking children brought to light in Special Rapporteur’s Report

The Irish Refugee Council, on 9^th August 2012, discussed a Special Rapporteur’s Report, discussing the specific difficulties that face children seeking asylum. Specifically, the Report highlights the difficulties of raising children in Direct Provision, the state-sponsored accommodation provided for asylum-seekers. Problems include “over-crowding, institutionalised poverty,” and the inability of parents “to provide their children with a normal family life.”

Children also face a higher risk of abuse, since poor conditions are rampant, the accommodation is crowded, and parents have little control over who interacts with their children.

The Report calls for research into the specific vulnerabilities that children of asylum seekers face, and the IRC celebrates this decision. The IRC also calls for a reform of Direct Provision, with the needs of the children addressed.

Brophy Solicitors

23.08.12

http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/news/special-vulnerabilities-of-asylum-seeking-children-brought-to-light-in-special-rapporteurs-report/1297

Journalist asylum-seeker released from detention

A Cameroon national who sought asylum in the UK was released from detention, reports the UK Guardian in an article reported on Monday, 13^th August.

The man fled Cameroon in 2007 after being abused by the ruling governmental party for supporting opposition groups. He was a journalist in Cameroon and he suffered mistreatment. He has resided in the state since, where he met and married a charity worker. He was ordered to return to Cameroon to apply for a spouses visa, and he offered to return voluntarily if the government could guarantee his safety, but as they could not, he refused to go. He was detained and given a deportation order, but has now been released and has been granted permission to apply for Leave to Remain.

Brophy Solicitors

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2012/aug/13/immigration-refugees-bernard-mboueyeu-cameroon-sheffield-uk-borders-agency

Theresa May blocks Chinese visa changes over security fears

An article from the UK Guardian on Thursday, 16^th August, discussed how Home Secretary for the UK Theresa May blocked an attempt to make it easier for Chinese visitors to obtain visas to visit the UK. She argues that it would “pose a national security risk,” and she blamed poor visitor numbers on “tourism chiefs not promoting Britain’s natural beauty properly.”

Culture secretary Jeremy Hunt revealed an £8m plan following the Olympics to triple the number of Chinese visitors to Britain by 2015, but May has stated her opposition to this plan. Currently, Chinese visitors are able to obtain an EU visa that allows them to visit 25 EU countries, but they need a separate visa to enter the UK. Hunt’s plan would make obtaining a UK visitor’s visa much easier for the Chinese visitors, but May has argued that “visa checks in Europe ‘do not match the UK decision quality’” and claimed that “British visa controls are a ‘key tool in protecting the public against significant harm.’” She cites national security as one of her main motivations for rejecting the plan, fearing that allowing more Chinese nationals to visit the UK would lead to more crime and a reduced sense of national security.

The article concludes by admitting, “The government is particularly keen to attract Chinese tourists because they are estimated to spend an average of three times more than other overseas visitors, but France receives 25-50% more Chinese tourists than the UK.

Brophy Solicitors

22.08.12

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/aug/16/theresa-may-blocks-chinese-visa

Burmese man not entitled to subsidiary protection

The Irish Times on Monday, 20^th August 2012, reported a decision made by the High Court regarding the application for subsidiary protection by a Burmese national. The court refused to review a decision refusing subsidiary protection to the Burmese man. The decision was reached because Mr Justice Cooke determined that his story lacked credibility, and the Court did not believe that he would suffer serious harm if returned to Burma.

The man had initially applied for asylum in Ireland after leaving Burma in 2008 due to religious clashes. He is a member of the Rohingyen ethnic minority, and claimed to have lived in a refugee camp with his uncle in Bangladesh. At the camp, he was offered a job in a religious group whose practices were banned in Bangladesh, and after overhearing a conversation regarding his forced removal to Afghanistan, he fled to Ireland, where he immediately claimed asylum. His claim was unsuccessful, and he proceeded to apply for subsidiary protection. The article reports that his council cited that “this was based on the fact that members of the Rohingyen minority suffered mistreatment, discrimination and hardship, and the danger of his being sold to Afghanistan constituted a threat of ‘serious harm’.” However, his application for subsidiary protection was refused, and he brought the matter before the High Court for a review, stating that “the Minister had not made a finding that the applicant was not a member of the Rohingyen minority. He argued he was therefore obliged to consider the treatment he might receive as a Rohingya if returned to Bangladesh. He said the Minister did not consider this in his refusal to grant subsidiary protection.”

However, Mr Justice Cooke ultimately refused the review, letting the decision rest as is. He ruled that while a member of the Rohingyen minority may face “economic and social difficulties” in Bangladesh, this did not constitute “serious harm” as is necessary to obtain subsidiary protection.

Brophy Solicitors

21.08.12

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0820/1224322492435.html

Children of non-EU nationals facing huge college fees

An article in the Irish Times on 17^th August reports that children of non-EU nationals are required to pay substantially more in college fees than an Irish national student. This financial burden means that in the first round of CAO offers, many non-EU students will be forced to reject or defer placements. Many of these students have resided in the state for a number of years, but the accumulated time is not sufficient to exempt them from the international student fees.

Children of non-EU nationals are required to register with the GNIB at the age of 16, and often, they are given residency classifications that mislabel them as foreign students or foreign workers, despite many of these students having resided in Ireland for a substantial length of time. They wish to apply for citizenship based on the citizenship of their parents, since without citizenship they do not qualify for the EU tuition rates, but most of the time, their parents have not resided in the state long enough to obtain naturalisation before the student turns 18 and begins applying for college.

Some universities have acknowledged this problem and allow these students to pay EU fees, which are less than non-EU fees but still substantially more than Irish fees. This system effectively bars many bright, capable students from going to colleges where they have well earned their place.

Brophy Solicitors

21.08.12

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0817/1224322324547.html

APPLICATIONS FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE CARD AND THE REQUIREMENT OF CO HABITATION

We act for many clients who are making applications  for permanent residence cards pursuant to of Directive 2004/38/EC and the EC (Free Movement of Persons) (No 2) Regulations, 2006 as amended.

Many of these applications are submitted on the basis that the applicant complies with the criteria of Article 16 (2) of the Directive – that is that he or she has resided legally with the Union citizen in the State for a continuous period of 5 years.  Similarly, Regulation 13 (6) refers to that family member “who has resided with the Union citizen in the State”

We submit that the requirements if Article 16/Regulation 13 is that both the EU and the non EU family member reside in the State for a five year period, but not necessarily that they co habit for the give year period. However, the Department of Justice continue to seek evidence that the couple resided together in the same household for that period.

We would refer to the case of PM (Turkey) [2011] UKUT 89 (IAC) in which the Upper Tribunal found that in the light of its objects and purpose Article 16(2) of the Citizens Directive is intended to afford all family members the right of permanent residence after five years residence in the host state where the EEA national has resided, whether or not they had actually cohabited throughout that period.

We would also point out that Article 7 (2) (and Regulation 6(3) (a)) both direct that a non EU spouse of an EU national shall be entitled a residence card if the EU spouse is exercising his/her EU Treaty Rights. Neither the Directive nor the Regulations direct that they be co habiting in order to be entitled to the initial five year residence card. Therefore, if the applicant has complied with the terms of Article 6/Regulation 6 for the period of their marriage, regardless of whether they were co habiting or not, it would be illogical to find the non EU citizen is then ineligible for the permanent residence card.

These points were assessed by Mr Justice Cooke of the High Court in the case of  Mohamud and Muna Abdulle Ali vThe Minister for Justice,  judgement dated 18^th February 2011.

Mr Justice Cooke held that requesting documentation that Ms. Ali had lived resided with Mr Mohamud was unlawful and unnecessary, since no such requirement had been directly stipulated in the Regulations or the Directive. Regulation 10(2) (b) even states that a non-EU national may retain the right to reside even in the event of divorce or annulment if the couple had been married for three years, including one year in the State. Mr Mohamud and Ms. Ali qualify under this stipulation as well. Therefore, Justice Cooke ruled that it was not a requirement that the non-EU national be residing in the same house with the EU national in order to qualify a residence card based on their EU Treaty Rights. The Court saying that it was a requirement is a mistake in law, and Justice Cooke quashed the refusal order.

Brophy Solicitors

10.08.12

UK Guardian: EU Students say permit delays are putting degrees at risk

An article in the UK Guardian reports how delays for work permits are damaging the employment opportunities for Romanian students. One student, Emilia Gheorghe, described how, as a second-year university student, she should be beginning work at a summer school, trying to boost her CV and help her obtain post-graduate employment. Instead, she is forced to wait for the UK Border Agency (UKBA) to process her application for a work permit. She submitted her application over eighteen months ago, and she still has not heard a decision. This delay has forced her into limbo, without permission to work, and she is missing valuable opportunities as a result.

The situation that Gheorghe is in is not unique. At least a few dozen other Romanian students studying in the UK have experienced extraordinary delays in the processing of their visa applications. Without the visa, students are not able to work part-time jobs to support themselves, and obtain jobs in their field to gain experience that could be crucial when it comes to starting a career. Various complaints have been lodged by the students to the UKBA, and a formal petition was filed, stating, “If the United Kingdom . . . would like to continue setting a high educational standard and attracting the best and brightest from across the glob, the UKBA needs to guarantee that it will process visa applications in a timely, transparent, and effective manner.”

When Romania and Bulgaria were accepted into the EU in 2007, there was an initial gradual transition period, where they were not allowed to work. However, after a few years, students obtained permission to work f they could provide a registration certificate confirming that they are students. The UKBA has promised to process these applications quickly, but students are experiencing a significant delay.

Ireland has recently lifted all restrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian workers, meaning that they now have total access to the labor market, but the UKBA has issued statements saying that it intends to keep the restrictions on the labor market in place until January 1, 2014, keeping them until the end of the seven-year transition period.

Brophy Solicitors

03.08.12

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/aug/02/work-permit-delays-plague-romanian-students

Immigration Backlog: New Warning from watchdog

The UK Border Agency is facing a growing crisis as the number of foreign nationals remaining in the State after their visas expires has risen to 150,000, reports an article from BBC news. The article reports that there is “no clear strategy” for how to prevent this from becoming a backlog, further increasing the chaos and inefficiency of the current system.

Many of these now-undocumented foreigners are students who have completed their degrees, and their permission to remain in the State as a student has expired. Some have tried to apply for permission to continue residing in the State, but without a significant tie to the UK, like a highly skilled job or a spouse, these applications are refused. Once their permission to remain has expired, they must exit the State or face a deportation order. Of these migrants who have been told to leave, the Border Agency has no way to tell how many have actually left. This creates a problem in the Border Agency’s eyes because that means that there is a growing population of undocumented migrants residing in the state. There is currently no scheme in place to hasten their removal.

The article reports that poor management leads to long queues at the airport as well as a backlog of work. This causes the immigration system to run even more inefficiently.

Brophy Solicitors

02.08.12

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18715036

Racist bullying of migrant children ‘ignored’

 An article in the Irish Independent from July, reports that racist bullying towards migrant children is increasing. Rather than developing a solution, perhaps by targeting the ignorance through educational outreach programs, the migrant children are told to develop a “thicker skin” to cope with the bullying. The article describes how “the ICI [Immigrant Council of Ireland] is calling on the Government to tackle racism and xenophobia ‘as a national priority’ through education and awareness-raising campaigns.” These migrant children have already endured hardship and trauma in their transition to a brand-new country, and the last thing they need is to face racist bullying from their peers at school. The Government should respond to the call from the ICI and establish programs that seek to reduce or eliminate such xenophobia.


Brophy Solicitors
2.08.12

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/racist-bullying-of-migrant-children-ignored-3161898.html