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

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