header-logo header-logo

19 June 2015
Issue: 7657 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Home Office liable for EU documentation delays

The Home Office may have to pay compensation in future to anyone adversely affected by delays in issuing EU documentation confirming their right to reside in the UK, following a landmark test case.

In R (on the application of Hana Zewdu) v Secretary of State for the Home Office (Crown Office ref: C/6067/2013), Mr Justice Green last week found the Home Office unlawfully delayed reaching a decision on the claimant’s right of residence. The secretary of state conceded she was therefore liable to pay damages for loss of earnings as well as damages on an aggravated basis.

Non-European Economic Area (EEA) family members of EEA workers, the self-employed, students and the self-sufficient are entitled to a right of residence in the UK, under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations. Once the Home Office receives an application, it is obliged to immediately provide a Certificate of Application, which gives the bearer the right to work in the UK. The Home Office is then required to make a decision on the application within six months.

The European Commission has previously raised concerns about the Home Office’s failure to comply with these time limits. However, the Home Office has previously relied on the case, AB v Home Office [2012] EWHC 226 (QB), to show that it has no obligation to pay compensation.

Trevor Hatton, senior solicitor at Duncan Lewis, who acted for the claimant, says Zewdu means the Home Office will no longer be able to rely on AB: “This case confirms once and for all that the secretary of state will be liable to pay damages to any applicant who has suffered loss as a direct result of a Home Office failure to provide EU documentation in a timely manner.”

Issue: 7657 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll