header-logo header-logo

15 January 2020
Issue: 7870 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Redraft ‘confusing’ immigration rules

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll