header-logo header-logo

11 August 2017
Issue: 7758 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Marriage

Sadovska and another v Secretary of State for the Home Departm ent [2017] UKSC 54, [2017] All ER (D) 171 (Jul)

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of a couple, who had been alleged to have entered into a marriage of convenience, on whether the lower court had taken the wrong approach to EU law. It had been for the Secretary of State to prove that the grounds for taking away the established rights of the first appellant, S, a national of the European Economic Area, had been established. It had not been for S to establish that her relationship with a foreign national had been a genuine and lasting one.

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

mfg Solicitors—Hayley Pearce & Lauren Williams

mfg Solicitors—Hayley Pearce & Lauren Williams

Law firm mfg Solicitors announces promotions at Ludlow office

Womble Bond Dickinson—Richard Sharpe

Womble Bond Dickinson—Richard Sharpe

Womble Bond Dickinson appoints partner in Leeds residential team

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners adds six to partnership in record year for partner promotions

NEWS
The legal profession's AI challenge extends far beyond fabricated case citations, according to a warning about the next phase of technological risk
Law firms should use the transition period before the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) assumes anti-money laundering (AML) supervision to strengthen governance and compliance, experts have warned
Cross-border disputes increasingly demand creative approaches to gathering evidence, with litigators needing to look beyond traditional letters of request
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified the distinction between contracts of 'indefinite' and 'perpetual' duration, with potentially significant implications for commercial drafting
The Court of Appeal was entitled to uphold the government's decision to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation, according to an analysis of the ruling
back-to-top-scroll