header-logo header-logo

Immigration

18 November 2010
Issue: 7442 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Elmi and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 2775 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 124 (Nov)

What mattered in relation to an application for fee exemption under the Immigration and Nationality Fees Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/1158), the Consular Fees Order 2008, SI 2008/676 and the Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2008, SI 2008/544 was that:

(i) the nature of the underlying visa or entry clearance application should be clear so that it was possible to see whether a fee was payable and whether a fee exemption might be available;

(ii) it was clear that an application for fee exemption was being made;

(iii) an evidential basis for the fee exemption was provided; and

(iv) a fee waiver power existed, even if it changed over time. If a fee exemption application was made and relevant evidence was not provided, it was to be hoped that the department would tell an applicant what at least the target of any evidence should be.
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll