header-logo header-logo

17 May 2013
Issue: 7560 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Left in limbo

A Home Office policy that leaves children in limbo by making successive grants of short periods of leave fails to consider the welfare and best interests of the child, the High Court has held.

In SM and TM and JD and Others v SSHD [2013] EWHC 1144 (Admin), Mr Justice Holman ruled the policy unlawful.

The case concerned foreign national children who were granted discretionary leave to remain for three years under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights when the Home Office policy DP5/96 was withdrawn.

Such children were usually granted indefinite leave to remain under the old regime. Sophie Freeman, instructing solicitor at Coram Children’s Legal Centre, said the judgment recognised that repeated grants of temporary status could be “damaging to the welfare of children and contrary to their best interests”.

Issue: 7560 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
The Environment Agency can prosecute offences beyond environmental legislation where proceedings support its statutory functions, the Divisional Court has confirmed
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
back-to-top-scroll