header-logo header-logo

10 July 2008 / Doron Blum , Matthew Davies
Issue: 7329 / Categories: Features , EU , Family , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Immigration and asylum update

POINTS BASED SYSTEM

ILLEGAL WORKING

WITHDRAWAL OF MARRIAGE POLICIES

Complication arising from the Home Office’s mission to simplify is keeping practitioners busy across the spectrum of immigration law. New obligations, with heavy penalties for breaching them, now attach to employers and migrants. The withdrawal of established policies and concessions, and confusion as to what replaces them and when, has characterised the “consolidation” of policy guidance. The piecemeal introduction of the points based system (PBS) for economic migration has challenged advisers to discern safe and lawful routes for applicants seeking to preserve, extend, or change immigration status in the UK. Undeterred, the government announces new measures with robust confidence and unprecedented pace.

POINTS BASED SYSTEM—RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
The Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC607 was laid before Parliament on 9 June 2008. Key provisions are as follows:

Tier 1
The sub-division of Tier 1 beyond the “General” (post-HSMP) category effectively replaces other existing categories. The Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP), Business Person, Investor/Innovator and International Graduate Scheme are withdrawn as at 30 June

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll