header-logo header-logo

05 July 2018
Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Justice slates incompetent advisers

nlj_7800_news

Immigration & asylum report highlights poor quality advice plaguing cases

Immigration and asylum seekers are regularly exploited or let down by unscrupulous or incompetent legal advisers, civil rights organisation Justice has revealed.

One solicitor had told the client the fee for counsel was five times what it was and pocketed the difference, according to a Justice report published this week, Immigration and Asylum Appeals – a Fresh Look. Justice found that certain firms provide poor quality legal representation and heard of ‘many examples of unsupervised, unqualified persons giving immigration advice’. It also highlighted ‘incompetent advice, verging on the dishonest, where proceedings bound to fail are launched’.

There is a shortage of solicitors in this field—the number providing legal aid has reduced since 2013 from 413 to 294.

A Justice Working Group chaired by Professor Sir Ross Cranston looked at Home Office refusal decisions, through statutory appeals and judicial review process to the right of appeal to the Court of Appeal. In its report, it presents 48 practical recommendations for change.

Sir Cranston said: ‘The immigration and asylum appeal system suffers from widely reported deficiencies and a culture of non-compliance with the rules and practice directions.

‘This leads to high volumes of cases in the appeals system and lengthy delays.’   

The recent removal of appeal rights by the Immigration Act 2014 has led to an increase in judicial reviews. Moreover, a high percentage of appeals against Home Office decisions are successful (40% of asylum appeals were successful in 2016/17), casting doubt on the quality of initial decision-making.

Justice’s recommendations include: getting Home Office decision-making right first time and building in an effective review system; improving communication between the parties at the decision-making, pre-hearing and hearing stages to ensure all relevant evidence is considered; and introducing clearer forms and translation services as the system moves to online processes.

Justice urges a crackdown on ‘unsupervised, unqualified and poor quality representatives purporting to provide advice and assistance to appellants’ through ‘heightened scrutiny mechanisms’. It suggests promoting the role of tribunal case workers and judicial case management to improve tribunal efficiency; and keeping rights of appeal as ‘a fundamental safeguard’ but ‘streamlining certain permission and review processes’.

Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll