header-logo header-logo

05 July 2018
Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Justice slates incompetent advisers

nlj_7800_news

Immigration & asylum report highlights poor quality advice plaguing cases

Immigration and asylum seekers are regularly exploited or let down by unscrupulous or incompetent legal advisers, civil rights organisation Justice has revealed.

One solicitor had told the client the fee for counsel was five times what it was and pocketed the difference, according to a Justice report published this week, Immigration and Asylum Appeals – a Fresh Look. Justice found that certain firms provide poor quality legal representation and heard of ‘many examples of unsupervised, unqualified persons giving immigration advice’. It also highlighted ‘incompetent advice, verging on the dishonest, where proceedings bound to fail are launched’.

There is a shortage of solicitors in this field—the number providing legal aid has reduced since 2013 from 413 to 294.

A Justice Working Group chaired by Professor Sir Ross Cranston looked at Home Office refusal decisions, through statutory appeals and judicial review process to the right of appeal to the Court of Appeal. In its report, it presents 48 practical recommendations for change.

Sir Cranston said: ‘The immigration and asylum appeal system suffers from widely reported deficiencies and a culture of non-compliance with the rules and practice directions.

‘This leads to high volumes of cases in the appeals system and lengthy delays.’   

The recent removal of appeal rights by the Immigration Act 2014 has led to an increase in judicial reviews. Moreover, a high percentage of appeals against Home Office decisions are successful (40% of asylum appeals were successful in 2016/17), casting doubt on the quality of initial decision-making.

Justice’s recommendations include: getting Home Office decision-making right first time and building in an effective review system; improving communication between the parties at the decision-making, pre-hearing and hearing stages to ensure all relevant evidence is considered; and introducing clearer forms and translation services as the system moves to online processes.

Justice urges a crackdown on ‘unsupervised, unqualified and poor quality representatives purporting to provide advice and assistance to appellants’ through ‘heightened scrutiny mechanisms’. It suggests promoting the role of tribunal case workers and judicial case management to improve tribunal efficiency; and keeping rights of appeal as ‘a fundamental safeguard’ but ‘streamlining certain permission and review processes’.

Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
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
back-to-top-scroll