header-logo header-logo

18 November 2010
Issue: 7442 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of Elmi and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 2775 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 124 (Nov)

What mattered in relation to an application for fee exemption under the Immigration and Nationality Fees Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/1158), the Consular Fees Order 2008, SI 2008/676 and the Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2008, SI 2008/544 was that:

(i) the nature of the underlying visa or entry clearance application should be clear so that it was possible to see whether a fee was payable and whether a fee exemption might be available;

(ii) it was clear that an application for fee exemption was being made;

(iii) an evidential basis for the fee exemption was provided; and

(iv) a fee waiver power existed, even if it changed over time. If a fee exemption application was made and relevant evidence was not provided, it was to be hoped that the department would tell an applicant what at least the target of any evidence should be.
 

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

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

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

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