Supreme Court Rules
Two new Supreme Court judgments (Munir and Alvi), promulgated on 18th July, 2012, have effectively ruled that all proposed Immigration Rules and substantive immigration requirements have to be laid before Parliament for approval before they can be lawfully enacted. This meant that substantive immigration requirements which have not been laid before Parliament for approval - like much of the Policy Guidance behind the Points-Based System and the Codes of Practice - were unlawful.
However, the government has already responded to these judgments by publishing new Statements of Changes and substantive immigration requirements which have subsequently been incorporated into the Immigration Rules on 20th July, 2012. The following immigration requirements are now to be found in the Immigration Rules and can no longer be challenged on the basis that they are unlawful for lack of parliamentary scrutiny:-
- Policy Guidance in respect of the Points-Based System which imposes substantive requirements
- The Codes of Practice
- English language requirements in general
- The guidance in respect of specified documents concerning the new family migration changes (Appendix FM), e.g. documents to satisfy the financial requirements, to show long-term personal care is needed in respect of adult dependent relatives, evidence of marriage or civil partnerships and evidence of English language requirements
The government has stated all applications considered on or after that date will be considered under the new rules.
Posted on Jul 18, 2012.