header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 July 2008 / Joe Middleton , Mark Henderson
Issue: 7328 / Categories: Features , Public , Employment
printer mail-detail

Public law update

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

HIghly skilled migrant programme
Expulsion

LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION
In a series of recent cases the courts have grappled with issues of legitimate expectation as they relate to people granted leave to live and work in the UK under the highly skilled migrant programme (HSMP). These migrants are by definition exceptionally well qualified and make a valuable contribution to the UK. Their problem has been that, having been encouraged to come here on a programme leading to settlement (permanent residence), the rules of the programme and their eligibility for employment were suddenly changed and they found themselves facing the prospect of having to leave the country.

AA and HSMP Forum
The first pair of cases arise from changes to the HSMP criteria in November 2006. These meant that many of those already on the programme who had expected to be able to settle in the UK in due course, suddenly became ineligible for any extension of leave. The appellants in AA (Pakistan) [2008] UKAIT 00003 (21 December 2007) had originally applied for HSMP status

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll