How will Priti Patel’s time as Home Secretary be remembered? And what can we expect from her successor, Suella Braverman?

After over three years in the role, former Home Secretary Priti Patel has been replaced. Her successor, Suella Braverman, represents something of a continuity figure in the role. Like Patel, she is both firmly on the right of the Conservative Party and a Brexiteer.

Formerly the Attorney General, some of Braverman’s most well-known views include withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights as well as supporting the sending of cross-channel migrants to Rwanda. She ran for the leadership in the most recent Conservative leadership contest and was eliminated in the second round with 27 votes.

But what can we expect from Braverman as Home Secretary and how will the Patel era be remembered?

Priti Patel – did she take back control?

Priti Patel’s time as Home Secretary under Boris Johnson’s premiership is likely be remembered as a tumultuous period. In her resignation letter, the former Home Secretary outlined some of her main achievements in the role as ending free movement and “taking back control of our borders” – a clear nod to Brexit and the reform to immigration.

But is it right to say that Britain has taken back control of its borders?

While EU immigration has plummeted, non-EU immigration to the UK reached its highest level ever recorded in December 2019. Furthermore, the unprecedented rise in small boat crossings over the past few years occurred almost exclusively under Patel.

When Patel was appointed in July 2019, the beginning of the Johnson premiership, the number of people crossing the English Channel in a small boat was fairly negligible, barely reaching 500. By the end of her time as Home Secretary in August 2022, the monthly total was 8,700 – the highest month total on record.

In order to deal with this, the government signed what Patel describes as a “world-first Migration and Economic Development Partnership” with Rwanda. However, enforced and voluntary returns are now at an near all-time low, decreasing from 45,000 in 2010 to 10,000 in 2021.

Other significant immigration policies and events which occurred with Patel as Home Secretary included the exit of Britain from the European Union in January 2020. This marked the advent of the points-based immigration system and the end of free movement with Europe, a substantial shift in immigration policy. This means that there is a blanket approach towards immigration regardless of where immigrants come from. To work in the UK, applicants require 70 points.

The Nationality and Border Act was another significant piece of legislation introduced by Patel. Under it a two-tier asylum system was introduced, making it so that those who make asylum claims after travelling through a third country such as France are inadmissible, with some exceptions.

Another legacy of Patel’s time as Home Secretary is the asylum backlog, which under her stewardship has gone from 40,000 to over 120,000. At the same time, the success rate for initial asylum applications actually rose to a new high of 76%, increasing from 25% in 2010. While Patel frequently railed against those crossing the Channel in small boats, the reality is that the vast majority of them were genuine refugees.

Finally, the Windrush compensation scheme which arose out of the Windrush scandal in 2018 has been largely unsuccessful. The Wendy Williams report published in March 2022 found that the Home Office had failed to take a more compassionate approach and had broken pledges to transform its culture.

Suella Braverman – a more extreme Home Secretary than Patel?

Despite Truss’s government being expected to take a more relaxed approach towards legal immigration, the same cannot be said for those who arrive as asylum seekers or illegally.

In recent days, the new Home Secretary Suella Braverman has been outspoken in interviews by saying that Britain has too many low-skilled migrants and international students who bring over dependants. This is despite the fact that under the new points-based immigration system, there is no route for low-skilled workers. It also appears to contradict recent briefings from the government that immigration rules will be loosened under the new Prime Minister Liz Truss as part of her ‘growth plan’, which recently u-turned on its cut to the top rate of tax.

In her speech at the Conservative Party conference, Braverman set out plans to bar those crossing the English Channel from claiming asylum in the UK. This would be a clear breach of the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1951 Refugee Convention. Braverman is also strongly supportive of the Rwanda plan introduced by Priti Patel, stating “I would love to have a front page of The Telegraph with a plane taking off to Rwanda, that’s my dream, it’s my obsession.” Judges are expected to rule on both High Court challenges to the Rwanda policy later this month.

Braverman was a fierce proponent of the British Bill of Rights proposed by Dominic Raab which would have given the UK Supreme Court legal supremacy over the European Court of Human Rights. One of its aims was to make it easier for the UK to deport immigrants and asylum seekers without facing legal challenges from European courts. Braverman has mentioned in recent days how she wishes to bring down immigration levels to “tens of thousands”, with the figure currently standing at 239,000.

However, the Truss government have recently ridden back on the idea of the British Bill of Rights, and it seems unlikely to go ahead at this moment in time. You can find out more about the British Bill of Rights here.

Despite resistance from the new Home Secretary, Prime Minister Liz Truss has ordered a review of the shortage occupation list, which would allow certain industries to bring in staff from overseas. This is in response to the UK’s labour shortage, which has followed the exit of the UK from the European Union.

Our thoughts

The UK’s hard-line approach towards immigration is likely to get tougher under Braverman, whose rhetoric in recent days has been harsh towards refugees, modern slavery victims, and low-skilled workers. With the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary seemingly at odds over immigration levels, it remains to be seen who will win this particular battle.

As usual, Lisa’s Law will bring you all the big news with regards to immigration. The biggest policy announcement so far from Braverman has been that she plans to go further than Patel by bringing in legislation banning those who enter the UK illegally from claiming asylum. It remains to be seen what legislation will be introduced over the next few months.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Is supporting a football team grounds for unfair dismissal under the Equality Act 2010?

“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it’s much more serious than that”. This famous quote by Bill Shankly is certainly a sentiment the claimant in this case, a life-long Rangers fan, would identify with.

Like Shankly, the claimant in this case was a fellow Scot. But unlike Shankly, who breached the sectarian divide in Glasgow between Celtic and Rangers, Mr McClung’s case rested on his fanaticism for Rangers Football Club and its loyalty to the United Kingdom and the Queen.

It is due to his support Rangers Football Club that Mr McClung believes he was denied work by his Celtic supporting manager while working as a subcontractor. He subsequently brought claims forward for unfair dismissal and discrimination.

Let’s take a deep dive into this case and see what conclusion the court came to.

Case background

To echo the words of Shankly, Mr McClung argued that supporting Rangers was a way of life and that it was as important for him as it was for religious people to go to church.

The claimant described Rangers fans as caring passionately about the Queen and having loyalty to Northern Ireland and the UK at large. Rangers and Celtic represent the sectarian divide of Protestants and Catholics which can be found in Scotland’s most populous city, Glasgow.

The employment tribunal decision in this case concerns the question of whether Mr McClung’s support of Rangers could qualify as a protected belief under the Equality Act 2010.

The Equality Act 2010

Section 10 of the Equality Act refers to the following:

(1) Religion means any religion and a reference to religion includes a reference to a lack of religion.

(2) Belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to a lack of belief.

(3) In relation to the protected characteristic of religion or belief—

(a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a person of a particular religion or belief;

(b) a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons who are of the same religion or belief.

The 2010 Act does not actually define what a “philosophical belief” is, however the Explanatory notes to the Equality Act sets out that for a philosophical belief to be protected under the Act:

it must be genuinely held;
it must be a belief and not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state

of information available;

it must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and

behaviour;

it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and

importance and

it must be worthy or respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with

human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.”

The claimant put forward the argument that due to his strong Unionist views, allegiance to the Queen, and protestant views, views he claims the “vast majority of Rangers fans” hold, his support of Rangers qualified as a philosophical belief.

Judgement

This was dismissed by the judge for a number of reasons, who considered the 5 components of the Grainger criteria during his dismissal. While they conceded that the claimant’s support of Rangers was genuine, for the second criteria they drew comparisons between supporting Rangers and being an active member or support for a political party, which had been dismissed in previous cases as constituting a philosophical belief.

The word ‘support’ contrasts with the word ‘belief’, which the judge defined as “an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof” or “an acceptance one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion”. It is for this reason that the judge found a comparison between support for a football club and support for a political party.

The third aspect of the Grainger criteria concerns whether the belief is a “weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour”. In this aspect, the claimant made reference to the Casamitjana case where it was decided that ethical veganism met all five of the Grainger criteria. Ethical veganism was therefore found to be eligible for protection under the Equality Act.

However, in this case it was found that ethnical veganism was a belief rooted in morality and prevalent in all aspects of the employee’s life. In contrast, the judge found that support for a football club was akin to a lifestyle choice rather than relating to a “substantial aspect of human life and behaviour”. The judge therefore found that the claimant did not satisfy the third criterion.

The penultimate criterion was that the belief must attain a “certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.” While the claimant’s support of Rangers was a serious and important matter to him, and he displayed support for the Union and loyalty to the Queen, the judge found that these factors were not prerequisites. Not all fans would support these factors. The judge decided that beyond a desire for the team to do well/win, support for Rangers has no larger consequences for humanity as a whole. The claimant therefore did not satisfy the fourth criterion.

Finally, the belief must be “worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with fundamental rights of others.” While the judge found the claimant’s support for Rangers was worthy of respect, the judge was not persuaded that it invoked the same respect in a democratic society as ethical veganism or the governance of a country.” He therefore did not satisfy the fifth criterion either.

With four out of the five criterions dismissed by the judge, the conclusion was that supporting a football team was clearly not a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010. As a result, this cannot be relied upon when it comes to claiming discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.

Our thoughts

The judgement which the judge came to through the usage of the Grainger criteria was well thought out and applicable in this case. For something to be a protected characteristic, there must be significant evidence that it constitutes a philosophical belief under Section 10 of the Equality Act 2010.

Ironically, support of a club like Rangers probably comes closest to this, owing to its significant links to the sectarian divide in Scotland and Northern Ireland. It is possible that another judge may therefore have been more sympathetic to the view put forward by the claimant in this case. However, for now at least, support for a football club is not a protected philosophical belief in the United Kingdom.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Naturalisation: Home Office updates good character requirement in line with the Nationality and Borders Act 2022

A person can apply for naturalisation and become a British citizen if they satisfy all the requirements. Some of these requirements include suitability requirements, eligibility requirements and passing the Life in the UK test.

If you are looking to apply for British citizenship, new changes to the good character requirement guidance mean that you can now apply even if you have previously overstayed. Contact us now, Mahfuz and his team will be more than happy to help!

Under the British Nationality Act 1981, it is mandatory that all applicants must satisfy the good character requirement.

Factors that usually breach the good character requirement would be if you have previously entered the UK illegally, overstayed your visa, or breached the Immigration Rules. The Home Office will look at any breaches dating as far back as 10 years prior to the citizenship application. As a result, in the past this requirement has prevented a number of people from being able to obtain British Citizenship.

This meant that lots of people who had permanent residence in the UK often found it difficult to apply for British Citizenship. In those 10 years if person has overstayed, entered illegally etc they would fail their British citizenship application.

Good character guidance updated for Nationality and Borders Act 2022

However, the Home Office has updated its guidance on good character requirement to adhere to the changes made in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022.

The changes now state that where a person has committed previous breaches of the Immigration Rules such us illegal entry, overstaying and absconding, these breaches may be disregarded in consideration of an applicant’s good character provided that all the following apply:

The person is applying for naturalisation as a British Citizen or registration after 28^th June 2022
That person holds Indefinite Leave to Remain
There are no concerns regarding the persons character which have arisen following the grant of Indefinite Leave to Remain

Accordingly, from 28^th June 2022, all with indefinite leave to remain (ILR) will be able to make an application for naturalisation without concern of their previous breaches of immigration rules.

Our comments

We welcome this much needed change to the immigration rules. We believe it was very harsh that periods of overstaying that happened for a very short period, many years ago, has prevented people in obtaining British citizenship. There are those who entered the UK illegally to flee danger and were subsequently granted refugee status who have also been unable to obtain citizenship.

With the UK government seeking to prioritise growth during a time of economic turbulence, they are reportedly planning to loosen immigration controls and increase the numbers of workers entering the UK. The latest relaxation of the good character guidance seemingly forms part of their plan to ensure that the UK is able to retain immigrants.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Welcome Rachel

We are delighted to welcome Rachel Fung, who joins Lisa’s Law as a legal assistant. Rachel initially joined Lisa’s Law as an intern, and has subsequently earned a permanent position due to her hard work and expertise.

Rachel is a recent LLB graduate from Durham University and a current full time Legal Practise Course student. She speaks fluent English, Cantonese, Mandarin (as well as AS level French!)

In her spare time, her favourite hobby is to explore new fun spots and exotic restaurants in London. In the long term, she aspires to become a versatile and well-rounded solicitor.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng announces ‘mini budget’ as UK battles the cost-of-living crisis

With the new Conservative government still in its infancy, New Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng was expected to put forward a ‘mini budget’ today. However, the set of measures announced turned out to be anything but mini. This budget saw the announcement of the biggest set of tax-cutting measures since 1972 in an attempt to deal with a stagnating economy and numerous crises. The government claim that this is the only way to boost economic growth. This budget represents a sharp turn from the last Conservative government by switching to a low-tax economy funded by high levels of government borrowing.

Critics, including the Labour Party and many other leading economists, have questioned the effectiveness of the plans, describing them as an example of ‘trickle-down economics’ and a return to the Thatcherism of the 1980s.

Let’s digest some of the key announcements and take a look at what they will mean for businesses and the public at large.

Tax

Tax cuts formed the vast majority of the announcements made in today’s budget. Under the previous government, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced that the basic rate of income tax would be cut by 1p to 19p from 2024. This has now been brought forward to April 2023.

Perhaps the most surprising measure for a government to announce amidst a cost-of-living crisis was that the additional tax rate of 45p for those earning over £150,000 would be scrapped from April next year. According to the Treasury, this will save the 600,000 highest earning people in the country an average of £10,000 a year in tax.

The planned rise of corporation from 19% to 25% has also been scrapped, a measure which will ensure the UK continues to have the lowest corporation tax rate in the G7.

Meanwhile, the planned 1.25% rise to National Insurance will also be reversed from 6^th November. This will save those earning £20,000 a total of £93 per annum, while those earning £100,000 per annum will save £1,093 per annum.

While these measures will all disproportionately benefit the wealthiest people in society, the government claim that this part of its plan is to boost growth and prosperity in the UK. Whether this example of ‘trickle-down economics’ will in fact have the desired effect remains to be seen.

Property

There were also a number of changes to the property sector announced, which will be of interest to conveyancers and property buyers alike.

Changes to stamp duty land tax (SDLT) are at the heart of the announcements, with the level at which house-buyers begin to pay stamp duty doubling from £125,000 to £250,000. This will save those who buy a house worth £250,000 a total of £2,500.

Meanwhile, first-time buyers will pay no stamp duty on homes worth £450,000, which is an increase from the previous threshold of £300,000. This will allow them to save £6,250.

Some within the conveyancing sector still recovering from the last cut to SDLT fear that this latest cut to SDLT will overheat the housing market and increase prices and mortgages.

Energy bills

Household bills will be cut by an average of £1,000 this year due to the energy price guarantee of £2,500, which will last for a two year period. This plan applies to those in England, Wales and Scotland.

Meanwhile, the six month £400 fuel bill discount will continue to go ahead alongside the newly announced additional support.

Businesses will also rejoice at the news that they will receive government support, with wholesale energy prices to be capped from 1^st October at 21.1p per kilowatt hours for electricity and 7.5p per kilowatt hour for gas.

This support package will cost approximately £60bn for the six months from October, which will be paid for by increased borrowing.

Other measures

The government made a number of further announcements in its budget today, some more controversial than others.

One that grabbed a lot of headlines was the plan to axe the cap on bankers’ bonuses, which was introduced by the European Union in the aftermath of the financial crisis in 2014. This forms part of a deregulation drive in the City of London in an attempt to make the City more competitive than it has been in recent years, to the benefit of cities like Paris, Frankfurt and New York.

With industrial action affecting several sectors over the summer, the government will introduce legislation requiring unions to put offers to their members during pay talks, meaning that any pay offers for employers would have to be put to a vote. Meanwhile, transport companies will also be forced to provide a minimum level of service during industrial action – something not welcomed by trade unions.

Our thoughts

The scale of the measures announced by the Chancellor today far outweighs any prior expectations. The UK is currently facing a huge cost of living crisis, driven by, but not solely due to the war in Ukraine, the after-effects of Covid, and Brexit. While the government claim that these measures will help to drive much-needed growth, they failed to provide an OBR forecast, something which usually accompanies a government budget announcement. The value of the pound also plummeted following the announcements, suggesting the markets don’t have much confidence in the measures proposed.

Whether this redistribution of wealth towards the wealthier people in society will help to boost the economy, it’s hard to argue with the fact that the optics of such measures during a cost-of-living crisis may not necessarily be as positive for the government as they would like. Nevertheless, the recently announced support for businesses and households alike to help with the huge increase in energy bills will be much welcomed across the UK.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Success in obtaining unreasonable costs following appeal against the Home Office

At Lisa’s Law, we deal with all manner of cases. We often like to highlight these if we feel that they might be of particular interest to those who wish to learn more about the legal sector or those who would like to see examples of the kind of work we take on board.

Today, our Immigration General Supervisor Mahfuz Ahmed takes us through a recent immigration case handled by Lisa’s Law. In this case, we succeeded in obtaining an unreasonable costs order against the Secretary of State for the Home Department following a successful appeal.

Keep reading to learn more about this appeal.

The case

We acted for our client in their appeal, who had been in the UK for 20 years. The Home Office refused his initial application, which we appealed. During the appeal, the Judge accepted that the client had been in the UK for 20 years continuously and allowed the appeal.

We did not stop at the allowance of the appeal. We believed that the Home Office’s refusal of our client’s case was completely unreasonable and a competent decision at the application stage would have saved much time and money which has now been spent on appeal.

Subsequently, we made an application for unreasonable costs order against the Secretary of State. Such orders to be granted are very rare however we were confident that refusing our client’s application was entirely unreasonable conduct. The Court accepted our application and agreed with our view. Finally, the Court ordered that the Home Office pay for our client’s legal fees incurred in representing our client in the appeal.

Our client was extremely pleased with the result, as not only did he obtain leave, but he was also reimbursed for the legal fees that he had incurred.

Conclusion

Although unreasonable costs orders are very rarely granted against the Home Office, if a case has been prepared well from the outset, we believe such an application should be made by all. Should such applications be made, this may ensure that the Home Office apply consistency in the level of due consideration when making decisions on immigration applications.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

With the passing of Queen Elizabeth II, will these famous products lose their Royal Warrant?

Following the sad passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, a number of the features of everyday life will begin to change. These include replacing Queen Elizabeth II with His Majesty King Charles III on all currency, changing the silhouette on stamps from Queen Elizabeth to King Charles, and, in the legal world, the Queen’s Counsel changing to the King’s Counsel.

While not of chief importance, a not insignificant matter to address is the issue of Royal Warrants addressed to companies and traders during the Queen’s long 70-year reign. Some of these companies include major household names like Cadbury, Kellogg’s and Heinz. If you’ve ever wondered why the Royal Arms of the United Kingdom appears on your box of cornflakes, then keep reading to find out why, and how this might shift with the dawn of a new King.

What is the Royal Warrant?

Royal Warrants are usually awarded because the companies granted them are official suppliers to the Queen and the royal households. It is therefore a badge of honour for companies to be able to display their Royal Warrant. You’ll know a product has a Royal Warrant because it will say “By appointment to Her Majesty the Queen” alongside the Royal Arms of the United Kingdom.

Businesses are able to qualify for a Royal Warrant by “supplying products or services on a regular and on-going basis to the Royal Households of Grantor/s for not less than five years out of the past seven.”

This means that businesses are only eligible for a Royal Warrant if they provide goods or services to the Royal Household. However, businesses that provide professional services such as newspapers, banks or veterinary services aren’t eligible.

The Royal Warrant allows a company to add a seal of approval on its products in the form of the Royal Arms of the United Kingdom. They can then use it on their marketing, commercial vehicles and in their business premises.

While the majority of Royal Warrants were granted by the Queen, not all of them were. In fact, of the roughly 800 Royal Warrants granted, 620 of these were granted by the Queen herself, 35 were granted by the late Duke of Edinburgh, and 182 by the Prince of Wales (now King Charles III).

How can companies lose a Royal Warrant?

The death of a monarch isn’t the only circumstance in which a business can lose its Royal Warrant. There are a number of reasons for which a Royal Warrant might be withdrawn from a business.

Reasons for this are listed as including:

The quality of a product or service is not up to standard
The product or service is no longer available or manufactured
The goods or services are no longer required or the orders have dwindled
The business itself stops trading
The company goes into liquidation or declared bankrupt
Or if there is significant change in the control or ownership of the company holding a Royal Warrant.

The withdrawal of a Royal Warrant is not an uncommon occurrence, with between 20 – 40 Royal Warrants being cancelled every year. Similarly, around the same number are also granted each year.

So, what happens now?

Officially, the 620 Royal Warrants granted by the Queen to these companies are now null and void. Despite this, there is no immediate need for the companies to take any action. This is because the warrant continues for two years after the date of the death of the grantor. In this case, the Queen. This is provided that there is no significant change of circumstances with the companies involved.

Nevertheless, these warrants will need to be reviewed by the Royal Household following the passing of the Queen. It is likely that, in addition to King Charles III remaining a grantor, the Queen Consort Camilla and the new Prince of Wales will also become grantors.

Will the appetites and tastes of the Royal Family change with the passing of the Queen? It’s quite likely! Perhaps King Charles isn’t quite as fond of Dubonet, a wine-based aperitif that was a key ingredient in the Queen’s favourite cocktail, Dubonet and gin. Likewise, it seems pretty unlikely that the handbag supplier Launer would meet the criteria of a good or service that the King requires!

While the change to companies holding Royal Warrants won’t be the most significant contrast between the Elizabethan era and the new Carolean era, it will have a consequential impact for some of the most popular brands in Britain today.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Welcome Xiaodan

We’re delighted to welcome Xiaodan, who joins us as a paralegal. Xiaodan has already made a fantastic impression on the team and displayed her excellent legal knowledge.

Xiaodan majored in English literature for her undergraduate degree at Xi’an International Studies University. She later transferred her major to law and recently completed her LLM courses at Queen Mary University of London which she is expecting the results for in

She has previously worked as an intern at Dentons Beijing, where she assisted with case management and due diligence.

Xiaodan is fluent in Mandarin and English, and is also capable of reading and writing in French.

In her spare time, Xiaodan likes watching films as well as exploring nature by hiking, going to parks, as well as bird watching. In the future, she would like to be an English qualified solicitor. She’s very happy to meet everyone at Lisa’s Law and looks forward to starting her journey!

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

With the arrival of the new immigration rules, when can the Home Office consider an asylum claim inadmissible?

By Zeyu Huang

The UK government has recently introduced new regulations under which lowers the bar for ruling an asylum claim inadmissible. An asylum-seeker is a person who has left their country and is seeking protection from persecution and serious human rights violations in another country, but who hasn’t yet been legally recognized as a refugee and is waiting to receive a decision on their asylum claim. Seeking asylum is a human right. Therefore, everyone should have the right to enter another country to seek asylum.

The new rules mean the Home Office does not have to consider the claim in the UK if they rule that another country – a “safe third country” – should in fact be responsible for your asylum claim.

What are the new sections of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 which relate to inadmissible asylum claims?

The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 inserted sections 80B and 80C into the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 to provide a wider scope for asylum claims to be treated as inadmissible. As pursuant to the new rules, Home Office may declare an asylum claim inadmissible and thereby hold it for an indefinite period, on the ground that there is a connection to a safe third State.

According to Section 80C, there are five conditions of the meaning of the connection to a safe third country:

1. The claimant has been recognised as a refugee in the safe third county and obtained the access to protection under the Refugee Convention in that State.

2. The claimant has otherwise been granted protection in a safe third State. He would not be sent from the safe third State to another State, unless it is in accordance with the Refugee Convention or Article 3 of the Human Rights Convention.

3. The claimant has made relevant claim to the safe third State and the claim has not yet been determined or has been refused.

4. The claimant was previously present in and eligible to make a relevant claim to the safe third State. And it would be reasonable to expect them to make such a claim and they failed to do so.

5. In the claimant’s particular circumstances, they would have reasonably been expected to have made a relevant claim to the safe third state

The definition of “safe third State” is in Section 80 B:

(4) For the purposes of this section, a State is a “safe third State” in relation to a claimant if:

(a) the claimant’s life and liberty are not threatened in that State by reason of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion,

(b) the State is one from which a person will not be sent to another State:

(i)otherwise than in accordance with the Refugee Convention, or

(ii)in contravention of their rights under Article 3 of the Human Rights Convention (freedom from torture or inhuman or degrading treatment), and

(c)a person may apply to be recognised as a refugee and (if so recognised) receive protection in accordance with the Refugee Convention, in that State.

What do the new rules on inadmissibility mean?

In practice, unless a claimant arrives in the UK on a valid visa, asylum seekers will likely need to travel across land through “safe countries”. Most asylum seekers making claims after 28 June 2022 are therefore likely to be treated by the Home Office as having made an inadmissible asylum claim.

Moreover, according to Section 80B, a declaration that an asylum claim is inadmissible is not a decision to refuse the claim and, accordingly, no right of appeal under section 82(1)(a) (appeal against refusal of protection claim) arises. It can therefore only be challenged by Judicial Review.

Conclusion

There have been delays in asylum decisions from Home Office for a long time. The new regulations of Sections 80B and 80C on inadmissibility have already caused further delays in asylum decisions. Such delays render their inability of settlement and work in UK, which exacerbates their poverty. According to the government’s own report, the majority of individuals subjected to this limbo are genuine refugees who will be allowed to remain in the United Kingdom in the long term.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Skilled worker visa vs Scale-up visa – which is best for employers?

You may have read our recent article about the brand-new Scale-up visa, which looked at how both employers and workers can benefit from the new visa route. You can find out more by reading it here. While the in-depth Scale-Up visa article mainly looked at the visa from an employee perspective, this article will look at the two types of visas to seek to try and answer the question of: which is the best type of visa for my business: Scale-up visa or skilled worker visa?

Firstly, it’s important to recognise whether your business qualifies for the Scale-up visa and skilled worker visa in the first place.

Scale-up visa

To qualify as a Scale-up visa sponsor, your visa must meet the following criteria:

You must have an annualised growth of at least 20% for the previous 3- year period based on either employment (your staff count) or your turnover
You must have had a minimum of 10 employees at the start of the relevant 3-year period

Scale-up companies are essentially high-growth start-ups. They total around 33,000 businesses in the UK according to the Scaleup Institute. Scale-up visas are issued to those in specific occupations, a full list of which can be viewed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/scale-up-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations/scale-up-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations

If you do not have a sponsorship license already, then you will need to apply for one. Your sponsorship license will be valid for 4 years, unless you surrender it, or it is revoked before that point.

It is important to note that the Home Office will have to securely access your Pay As You Earn information, as well as VAT returns that you have submitted to HMRC.

If you do not meet the criteria for qualifying as a Scale-up visa sponsor, then you may wish to go down the skilled worker visa route instead.

Skilled worker visa

The skilled worker visa is probably the most common immigration route for overseas nationals who wish to come and work in the UK. Unlike the Scale-up visa, the minimum skill level for a Skilled worker visa role is RQF level 3, while for a Scale-up visa role it is RQF level 6.

As with the Scale-up visa, the prospective employee’s company must have first applied for a sponsorship license. This has become particularly important since Britain left the EU on 1^st January 2021, given that many workers from the EU or EEA now require a work permit. You do not need to sponsor a worker if they are a ‘settled worker’. Sponsors must also be able to demonstrates that they can offer “genuine employment”.

Benefits of Scale-up visa for employers

There are some major benefits to the Scale-up visa which make it the best choice for certain types of employers.

Some of the main benefits of the Scale-up visa are as follows:

It is classed as a temporary worker route. This means employers can make significant cost savings due to lower sponsorship fees
Exemption from the Immigration Skills Charge, which is payable for Skilled worker visas. If the worker stays with the business for five years, this will reduce fees by up to £5,000 per applicant.
Home Office sponsorship license compliance duties only last 6 months
Applying for a Scale-up sponsor license will allow you to employ highly skilled migrant workers to take your business to the next level and expand quickly
If you are already an approved sponsor, you can simply add the Scale-up sponsor license to your existing license

Benefit of Skilled worker visa for employers

Employers don’t have to pay workers at least £33,000 per annum, as is the case with the Scale-up visa. The lower limit for a Skilled worker visa is £25,600 per annum
Greater security – employees on a Scale-up visa can change jobs or employers after 6 months
Skilled worker visa must apply for a new visa if they wish to change jobs or employers during the five-year visa period. It is therefore easier to retain them with a skilled worker visa
Your business doesn’t have to be experiencing rapid, high levels of growth to go down the Skilled worker route
May be better long term, especially if you think your company will want to employ migrant workers beyond four years
Less niche in terms of the variety of roles. Scale-up is tailored towards a smaller selection of highly-skilled roles

Our comments

At the end of the day, both routes have their pros and cons. It isn’t always easy to work out which route is the right one for you, so if you have any doubts, it is always worth checking with an expert. While the Scale-up visa will be a more attractive option for many businesses, and is more suited to fast-growing start ups, the Skilled worker visa route will probably be better suited to companies that wish to employ migrant workers in the long term. It might be more expensive in the short term, but this route will probably give you more stability and flexibility.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how companies use the Scale-up worker right moving forward. We can only welcome the arrival of this route, as it simply gives companies more options to recruit workers from abroad and makes it easier for employers to adapt to their particular circumstances.

Lisa’s Law will be able to advise you whether your circumstances meet the requirements of a Scale-up visa or if the Skilled worker visa is the best option for your business. Get in touch with us today using the details below – we will be more than happy to help!

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Have a question? Our friendly and experienced team are here to help.

Subscribe to our newsletter

We post weekly articles covering a variety of topics, including immigration, property, and more, so subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates.