header-logo header-logo

Redraft ‘confusing’ immigration rules

15 January 2020
Issue: 7870 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail
Home Office officials should take a ‘less prescriptive approach to evidence’ and redraft the Immigration Rules to save money, speed up decision-making and build trust, according to the Law Commission

While not making any recommendations on substantive immigration policy, the Law Commission report on the Simplification of the Immigration Rules, published this week, suggests improvements to the way the rules are written and presented could save the government as much as £70m over the next decade. It recommends ‘a complete redrafting’ to make the rules easier for applicants to understand, as well as introducing a twice-yearly limit to updates, in April and October.

It also recommends the Home Office reduce the level of detail and prescription required, as this has led to increasing numbers of amendments and changes, making the rules more complicated.

The Commissioners say these changes would save the Home Office money by reducing mistakes and, consequently, administrative reviews, appeals and judicial reviews.

Nicholas Paines QC, Public Law Commissioner, said: ‘For both applicants and case workers, the drafting of the Immigration Rules and frequent updates makes them too difficult to follow.

‘This has resulted in mistakes that waste time and cost taxpayer money. By improving the drafting, restructuring the layout and removing inconsistencies, our recommendations will make a real difference by saving money and increasing public confidence in the rules.’

In the past decade, the rules have nearly quadrupled in length, stretching to more than 1,100 pages in 2019. The Law Commission described the structure as ‘confusing’ and the numbering system as ‘inconsistent’. Moreover, it found duplication between different types of application and unnecessary repetition within categories.

On evidence, the Law Commission recommended a more flexible approach could involve providing a non-exhaustive list of examples and asking for any other document that meets requirements.

Issue: 7870 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll