UK BILL INTRODUCED TO END FREE MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE

The United Kingdom has recently passed The Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill, which was first introduced on 5th March 2020. The Bill, which ends the principle of free movement of people in the United Kingdom, is set to be introduced upon the conclusion of the transitional period on 31st December 2020.

The Bill, passed by 351 votes to 252 on 18th May 2020, has marked concrete developments in the UK’s transition into a points-based immigration system. The UK government clarified in February that points will be awarded for certain requirements such as the ability to speak English, having a job offer from an approved employer and meeting a salary threshold of £25,600. Points may also be awarded for certain qualifications or for working in an area where there is a shortage of workers.

However, the Bill clearly prioritises migrants with “high skilled jobs” which concerningly appears to be determined based on financial thresholds above any other factor.

UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, has stated “We’re ending free movement to open Britain up to the world. It will ensure people can come to our country based on what they have to offer, not where they come from.”

The Bill includes provisions intended to uphold the historical entitlement of Irish citizens to enter and remain in the UK without the need of seeking permission or leave to do so.

These provisions relating to Irish citizens will operate alongside the Common Travel Area (CTA) regime once EU freedom of movement comes to an end.

Under the CTA, Irish citizens are permitted to move freely between Ireland and the UK and vice versa. This extends to the right to enter, reside, pursue education, take up employment and access State benefits. On the 8th May 2019, both the Irish and UK government signed a Memorandum of Understanding which reiterated their commitment to the CTA and to the maintenance of the derived rights from this agreement.

The Bill has made it clear that the rights being afforded to Irish citizens are more far-reaching than those afforded to other EEA nationals. The UK government’s position is that Irish people will have a general right to reside in the UK which is separate to their rights as EU citizens.

Although this Bill provides legislative certainty to Irish citizens on their rights to enter and reside in the UK without leave, disappointingly the provisions are not yet provided for in comprehensive detail.

The Irish  Human Rights and Equality Commission called for an international treaty in their November 2018 report to formalise common immigration rules and the rights of Irish citizens in the UK during the wake of the uncertainty caused by Brexit.

The Bill places EEA and Non-EEA nationals on the same footing in terms of immigration permissions in the UK.

The free movement of people across 28 countries, considered to be one of the greatest achievements of the European Union, has been significantly reduced by this Bill.

The UK’s new system will take a restrictive economic approach to those considered eligible to travel to the UK and will disproportionately affect those not considered to be “skilled workers” i.e. those who earn less than £25,600 per annum.

This concern caused by this Bill is exacerbated by the ongoing Covid-19 crisis, and the proposed immigration rules will undoubtedly deem many healthcare workers ineligible to reside in the UK.

Despite the Home Secretary referring to the introduction of a fast-track visa for doctors, nurses and other health professions, the passing of this Bill will understandably create a huge amount of worry to those already facing extreme pressure and uncertainty caused by both Brexit and Covid-19.

It’s expected that this Bill will consequently restrict the freedom of movement of UK citizens in both the EU and outside the EU.

It seems that further details of the UK’s move towards a controversial points-based system will likely not be formalised until the conclusion of the transitional period in December 2020.

 

UK GOVERNMENT CONFIRMS PEOPLE BORN IN NORTHERN IRELAND ARE TO BE CONSIDERED EU CITIZENS FOR CERTAIN IMMIGRATION PURPOSES

The UK Government has announced a change to its immigration laws following a landmark court case involving Derry woman Emma De Souza and her US-born husband Jake De Souza.

The case concerned the right of people in Northern Ireland to be considered Irish or British citizens, or both, as per the terms of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

Mr De Souza had applied to the UK Home Office for an EEA residence card to live and work in Northern Ireland on the basis of his marriage to Ms De Souza in 2015. The application was rejected on the basis that Ms De Souza was considered a British citizen because she was born in Northern Ireland, and therefore she was not entitled to EU free movement rights. This was despite the fact that Ms De Souza had never held a British passport and identified as an Irish citizen.

The UK Home Office originally argued that people born in Northern Ireland are automatically British citizens according to the 1981 British Nationality Act, even if they identify as Irish. It stated that the only way it could deal with Mr De Souza’s application was if Ms De Souza renounced her status as a British citizen.

Ms De Souza argued that the UK’s immigration laws were incompatible with the right of Northern Irish people to be accepted as Irish or British, or both, under the Good Friday Agreement.

The UK Home Office has now made a change to its immigration laws, confirming that British and Irish citizens born in Northern Ireland will be treated as EU citizens.

This decision has far-reaching consequences in light of the UK’s EU Settlement Scheme, which is open for applications until June 2021. The Scheme allows EU citizens and their family members to apply to reside in the UK post-Brexit. Until now, family members of British or dual British-Irish citizens from Northern Ireland were ineligible to apply for status under the Scheme.

All citizens in Northern Ireland will now have the right to apply for a non-EEA family member to remain in the UK through the Scheme, up until June 2021. This means that British citizens in Northern Ireland now have more rights than their counterparts in England, Wales and Scotland.

Speaking about the announcement, Ms De Souza commented:

“These changes are on the back of years of campaigning for the full recognition of our right to be accepted as Irish or British or both under the Good Friday Agreement.

We have always contended that no-one should be forced to adopt or renounce a citizenship in order to access rights, to do so goes against both the letter and the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement, the Home Office now concedes that point.

These changes will only apply to Northern Ireland and recognise the unique status that the region holds within the United Kingdom. Something that we have longed called for.

We personally know a number of families that will benefit from this change and are filled with joy and relief that these families will not face calls to renounce British citizenship or face years in court like we have.”

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANNOUNCES FURTHER EXTENSION OF IMMIGRATION PERMISSIONS

The Department of Justice has announced an additional two-month extension of immigration permissions due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

This temporary extension applies to the following categories:

  • Persons with immigration permissions due to expire between 20th May 2020 and 20th July 2020, including those that were already extended under the previous notice issued on 20th March 2020;
  • Persons awaiting their first registration, having been granted permission to land at a port of entry on condition they register at Burgh Quay or their local registration office within 3 months, but who have not yet done so;
  • Persons resident in Ireland on the basis of Short Stay visas.

The notice confirms that the permissions will be automatically renewed for a two-month period, on the same basis as the existing permission and subject to the same conditions.

The notice also clarifies that international English Language Students can continue to work if they wish but that they must also re-enrol in an online course of study to adhere to the conditions of their permission.

The registration office in Burgh Quay in Dublin will remain closed and will only reopen when it is safe to do so. The normal requirements to register residence permission will not arise until the registration offices can reopen or alternative arrangements are put in place.

Non-nationals can present evidence of their last residence permission, in the form of a formal decision letter and/or the IRP card, together with a copy of the Notice, as evidence of their ongoing permission to remain in the State.

The notice can be accessed here.

If you or a family member are affected by this notice, please contact our office to discuss.

RECENT HIGH COURT JUDGMENT UPHOLDS DECISION TO REFUSE IRISH PASSPORT TO CHILD OF SUBSIDIARY PROTECTION HOLDER

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON REFUSAL OF NATURALISATION BASED ON GOOD CHARACTER ARISING FROM ROAD TRAFFIC OFFENCES

The Court of Appeal delivered its judgement on 12th May 2020 in the case of Talla v Minister for Justice and Equality [2020] IECA 135.

The case concerned a Kosovan man whose application for naturalisation was refused on the basis that he was not of “good character” due to having previously committed road traffic offences in the State. He had travelled to Ireland in 2002 when he was 14 years old, and has two Irish born children.

The traffic offences in question related to a routine speeding offence in 2011, to which he was fined €380 and a conviction for driving his brother’s car without the appropriate insurance in the same year.  It was noted that the Appellant believed he was covered by insurance and an insurance company had said he was a named driver on his brother’s policy but was not insured on the particular car he was driving. He subsequently paid a fine of €400 for this offence.

In 2016, other charges including failure to produce were struck out and an insurance charge was brought to court in September 2017. It is noted that the Appellant pleaded guilty to this offence but that the District Judge accepted the explanation and plea of mitigation that the insurance policy had not been renewed as a result of a genuine oversight on the part of the Appellant’s brother.

The Appellant applied for naturalisation in 2013 and answered “no” to a series of questions concerning offences and convictions.

When these incidents were brought to the attention of the Appellant and his solicitors in 2014 and in 2017, during the process of his application, explanations were provided to INIS for each of these incidents in considerable detail.

In February 2018, the Minister refused the application for naturalisation. The decision had described the Applicant as having “a history of non-compliance with the laws of the State”.

Delivering the judgement, Mr Justice Haughton, said that that the submission prepared for the Minister which recommended the refusal of his application, failed to refer to any of the explanatory information provided by the Applicant’s solicitors.

The three judge Court of Appeal found that it was not evident that those who had prepared the submission which included an An Garda Siochana report, had considered the exculpatory information presented to INIS.

The Court of Appeal confirmed that the Minister is entitled to take into account a series of infringements of the Road Traffic Acts in assessing whether an applicant is of “good character”.

However, the Court clarified that:

“In the instant case it is “the nature of the offences” that led the Minister to refuse the
application on the grounds that the appellant was not of “good character”. As noted by Faherty J [Zaigham v MJELR [2017] IEHC 630] not all road traffic offences will debar an application. Minor offences do not necessarily reflect on a person’s “good character”, particularly if balanced against other matters in their favour. It is therefore the case that where there are road traffic offences it is the nature of those offences and the circumstances in which they were committed that will demand more attention”. [Para 36]

The Court confirmed that the Minister is entitled to take into consideration “spent convictions” (7 years since effective date of conviction) in considering “good character” for the purpose of assessing naturalisation applications.

Yet, the Court of Appeal reaffirmed in paragraph 37 that:

“While criminal convictions, or the commission of offences, are relevant to
this enquiry and assessment, it is wider in scope than that, and the outline facts and any mitigating circumstances, the period of time that has elapsed since the last conviction, and other factors that may be relevant to character, must all be taken into consideration”.

The Court went on to consider the importance of the Minister providing reasons for a refusal, on the basis of a history of road traffic offences, where the applicant may re-apply in the future. Further, where the Minister relies on the nature of road traffic offences to determine that an applicant is not of good character, the understanding of the nature of offences which led to this conclusion needs to be expressed in reasons that can be understood by the applicant.

The Court of Appeal ultimately overturned the decision of the High Court and found that it could not be concluded that the decision maker- the Director General on behalf of the Minister- had considered all relevant material on file.

The judges opined that a number of concerns arose from the fact that there was no mention in the submission to the Minister of any of the explanations given by the Applicant or his solicitors. The Court found this surprising as they considered them to contain facts of central importance and the lack of such mitigating information therefore created an imbalance.

The Court of Appeal concluded that the Minister had not considered and weighed all relevant considerations before deciding to refuse a certificate for naturalisation and ordered that the decision be quashed and the application be reconsidered in accordance with this judgement.

We at Berkeley Solicitors welcome this very encouraging clarification surrounding road traffic offences and the requirement to be of “good character” in accordance with Section 15A(1) of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956.

In our experience road traffic offences are one of the most common reasons for refusal of naturalisation applications, based on good character grounds.

It is very clear from the judgement that the deciding officer’s submission to the Minister regarding such offences must also include a summary of mitigating factors, or otherwise the Minister’s conclusion on good character is not reached in a fair and balanced manner.

We would submit that the time that has elapsed since the minor road traffic offences and the fact an applicant has not had any further offences are mitigating factors that should always be brought to the Minister’s attention, and minor traffic offences should not be held against Applicants indefinitely.

Our office is experienced in the submission of applications for naturalisation as an Irish citizen and do our best to assist our clients through this lengthy application process. If you or your family are impacted by these issues or similar issues, please do not hesitate to contact us to discuss this in more detail.

The judgement can be read in full here.

CURRENT DELAYS IN PROCESSING APPLICATIONS FOR NATURALISATION AS AN IRISH CITIZEN

Many of our clients are currently experiencing considerable delays in the processing and determination of their application for naturalisation based on five years reckonable residency or three years reckonable residency based on the spouse or civil partner of an Irish citizen.

The Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service proposes to render decisions for naturalisation applications within six months.

Despite the INIS website stating that “in general, it takes 6 months for a straightforward application to be processed from  the date it is received to the date a decision is made”, in the experience of Berkeley Solicitors, many people continue to experience delays well beyond the proposed time frames.

We are aware of an increasing number of applicants who have been waiting more than two years on the determination of their application. We are also aware of a number of applicants waiting up to four years on their determination.

These long and continued delays in the processing of naturalisation applications has been understandably very frustrating for our clients. Many of our clients are not provided with an explanation for these inordinate delays.

We note this issue has previously been reviewed in Dana Salman v Minister for Justice and Equality. This case involved a hearing in order to establish liability of costs in respect of Judicial Review proceedings challenging the Minister’s delay, of three years and nine months, in issuing a decision on an application for naturalisation.

As no reason for the delay had been given by the Minister and no system was in place to ensure to fair processing of such applications, on 16th December 2011, Mr Justice Kearns of the Supreme Court awarded costs to the Applicant.

Further, we would highlight that in June 2011, then Minister for Justice and Equality and Defence, Mr Alan Shatter stated that, upon entering office, he had taken steps to deal with the extensive backlog of citizenship applications and under the new system, those applying for citizenship would receive “a decision on their application within six months”.

Unfortunately, for a large number of clients, this time-frame has not been adhered to.

There are very substantial delays now occurring in the processing of applications for naturalisation and we have noticed an increased number of clients contacting our office in recent weeks, with queries as to what the options available to them are.

Due to these ongoing delays, our office has issued High Court Judicial Review proceedings on behalf of our some clients, to challenge these unlawful delays before the High Court, which are causing severe stress and anxiety to those lawfully resident in Ireland and who meet the requirements under the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956.

Our office is experienced in the submission of applications for naturalisation as an Irish citizen and do our best to assist our clients through this lengthy application process. If you or your family are impacted by these issues or similar issues, please do not hesitate to contact us to discuss this in more detail.

DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO COVID-19 VISA APPLICATIONS IN IRELAND AND THE UK

The Covid-19 pandemic has resulted in a vast decrease in international travel, and many people with valid Irish visas are now unable to enter the State during the validity period of their visa.

The Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service has stated that it will not re-issue visas for new dates at this time, and those individuals who cannot travel to Ireland during the validity period of their visa will need to reapply for an Irish visa at a later date.

This is in contrast to the approach of the UK Government which has published the following announcement:

“If your 30 day visa to travel to the UK for work, study or to join family has expired, or is about to expire, you can request a replacement visa with revised validity dates free of charge until the end of this year.

To make a request, contact the Coronavirus Immigration Help Centre…

You’ll be contacted when our VACs reopen to arrange for a replacement visa to be endorsed in your passport.

You will not be penalised for being unable collect your BRP while coronavirus measures are in place.

This process will be in place until the end of 2020.”

The announcement can be read in full here.

We at Berkeley Solicitors find the approach of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service on this issue to be extremely disappointing and unfair to those individuals who have recently been granted visas for Ireland, many of whom may have been waiting many months to receive a decision on their visa application.

We call on the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service to revise their position on this matter and consider adopting a similar approach to that of the UK, allowing those affected to request replacement visas with new validity dates.

If you have any queries about applying for an Irish visa at this time, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

VISA DECISIONS CONTINUE TO BE ISSUED DURING THE COVID-19 CRISIS

We are happy to confirm that decisions in respect of visa applications to travel to Ireland continue to be issued by visa application centres, Irish Embassies and Consulates during the Covid-19 crisis.

Many Embassies, Consulate offices and visa processing centres are closed or are working at a reduced capacity, and so it is encouraging to see that decisions are still being issued throughout the pandemic.

Although there is a significant reduction in the number of decisions being issued in comparison to before Covid-19, it is good news to see clients are being issued with decisions on their pending applications, particularly because many people experience delays, beyond the guideline processing times, in order to have family members issued with visas in order to join them in the State.

Visa decision pages of INIS and respective Embassies and Consulates continue to be updated online.

Our office continues to act for many clients who wish to submit visa applications and who currently have pending visa applications, and we are continuing to liaise with INIS on behalf of our clients in this regard.

We at Berkeley Solicitors would encourage anyone with queries regarding visa applications to contact our office and we would be more than happy to advise.

UPDATED INFORMATION ISSUED IN RELATION TO IMMIGRATION SERVICES DURING COVID-19

The Immigration Service Delivery has issued an updated set of frequently asked questions in relation to Covid-19 and its effects on immigration services in the State.

The comprehensive document now confirms that the notice is applicable to those who have permission based on Working Holiday Authorisations.

This welcomed clarification means those whose Working Holiday Authorisation has expired/is due to expire between 20th March 2020 and 20th May 2020 will have their permission extended for a period of two months from date of expiry.

Further, it means that those who have not been able to attend their first-time registration based on their Working Holiday Authorisation may use their permission letter as evidence of their permission in the State.

The full document can be read in full here.

If you have any queries on the above, please contact our office and we would be happy to advise.

IMMIGRATION SERVICE DELIVERY ANNOUNCES CHANGE OF PERMISSION APPLICATIONS CAN BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY UNTIL 20TH MAY 2020

Immigration Service Delivery issued a new notice on 27th April 2020 confirming that a number of change of permission applications may be submitted electronically on a temporary basis until 20th May 2020.

The notice confirms as follows:

“In light of the uncertainties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, as a temporary measure between now and 20th May 2020, applications for the following change of permissions may be submitted electronically to the Registration Office, Burgh Quay, Dublin ([email protected]):

 

From Stamp To Stamp
Stamp 1 (Critical Skill Employment Permit) Stamp 4 (after 2 completed years on CSEP and DBEI Stamp 4 support letter)
Stamp 1 (Employment Permit) Stamp 4 (after 5 completed years on Employment Permits)
Stamp 2 Stamp 1 (Employment Permit)
Stamp 2 Stamp 1A (Trainee Accountant Contract)
Stamp 1, 2 or 3 Stamp 1G (Spouse of Critical Skill Employment Permit holder)
Stamp 1, 2 or 3 Stamp 4 (Spouse of Irish National)

 All required documentation should be scanned and included in the application. All eligibility criteria will continue to apply.

 Where a permission has been granted, applicants will still be required to register the change as normal once the Registration Office in Burgh Quay and local Registration Offices reopen.”

 

This is a positive development for any clients who wish to submit an application for change of permission and who fall within the categories listed in the notice.

Our office continues to act for many clients who have pending immigration applications, and we are continuing to liaise with INIS on behalf of our clients as normal.

The full notice can be read here.

If you would like more information regarding an application for change of permission, please contact our office.

RECENT REFUSALS OF EMPLOYMENT PERMIT VISAS

HIGH COURT DECISION ON REFUSAL OF EMPLOYMENT PERMIT FOR TRAINEE ACCOUNTANT

On 25th March 2020, Mr Justice Heslin delivered his judgment in Julia Olivera Rodriguez v The Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation.

This case concerned a Venezuelan national with a BSc. Degree in Public Accounting from Venezuela and a Certificate in Business Accounting which she obtained in Ireland through the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants in May 2018.

Ms Rodriguez’s application for an Employment Permit for the role of Trainee Accountant was refused by the Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation on the basis that the position of Trainee Accountant does not fall within the list of eligible categories of employment, as set out in the Employment Permits Regulations, 2017.

Ms Rodriguez challenged this decision in the High Court, arguing that the Minister had been incorrect in this finding and that the role of ‘Accountant’ should be interpreted to include those training for the position, as is the case in the UK.

Mr Justice Heslin in his decision stated:

“I am entirely satisfied that the 2017 Regulations cannot be interpreted in the manner in which the applicant contends. Doing so would involve this Court importing into the 2017 Regulations words which are simply not there and also ignoring the plain meaning of words which incontrovertibly appear in the 2017 Regulations.”

Mr Justice Heslin stated that the regulations very clearly set out employments of which there is a shortage and which are required for the proper functioning of the economy, including Accountants and Tax Consultants with particular specialisms and specified experience:

“Schedule 3 of the 2017 Regulations very clearly sets out those employments in respect of which there is a shortage in relation to “qualifications, experience or skills” required for the proper functioning of the economy and these include “Chartered and Certified Accountants” with particular specialisms, “Qualified Accountants” with particular experience and “Tax Consultants” with specified experience. As a matter of fact, the applicant falls into none of the categories specified in Schedule 3. For this Court to hold that she does, would be to do violence to the specific words used in Schedule 3 and would amount to this Court deciding, impermissibly, that someone who is unqualified comes within a category which explicitly addresses shortages in “qualifications”. This Court has no power to ignore the clear wording in Schedule 3 of the 2017 Regulations and to hold that shortages in the qualifications set out in Schedule 3 are met by unqualified persons.”

The court found that Ms Rodriguez does not fall within any of these categories and the decision to refuse her application for an Employment Permit was upheld.

The full text of the judgment can be found here.

If you would like more information on the application process for Employment Permits in Ireland, please do not hesitate to contact our office.