header-logo header-logo

31 January 2008 / Hina Majid
Issue: 7306 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

A step too far

Special immigration status is highly objectionable, costly and unnecessary, says Hina Majid

A particularly obnoxious piece of legislation—Pt 12 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill—is easing its way through the corridors of . Part 12 creates a special immigration status (SIS), which classifies its recipients as people without leave to remain in the , and prevents them from obtaining temporary admission.

 

Its bite, however, penetrates far more deeply, incapacitating its recipients through the indefinite denial of those basic rights most of us take for granted. The right to earn a living and to sustain a family home, to access mainstream housing or welfare benefits, to access most secondary healthcare, and all forms of further and higher education are all likely to be withdrawn as a result of the operation of the scheme. So, too, is the ability to secure residential stability though acquisition of settlement or British nationality for the SIS’s duration.

 

FOREIGN NATIONAL CRIMINALS

SIS can be applied to “foreign

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll