Immigration News Weekly Roundup – 14 July 2023

News story: National Security Bill becomes law – Home Office

On 11 July, the National Security Bill became law after being passed by both Houses of Parliament and securing Royal Assent. This new act brings together vital new measures to protect the British public, modernise counter-espionage laws and address the evolving threat to our national security.

With this new legislation, the UK is now a harder target for those states who seek to conduct hostile acts against the UK, which include espionage, foreign interference (including in our political system), sabotage, and acts that endanger life, such as assassination.

To read the full article, click here


£2.5 million funding boost to support vulnerable EUSS applicants – Home Office

An additional £2.5 million in grant funding will go to 17 organisations across the UK that support vulnerable people in applying to the EU Settlement Scheme. This funding will help to ensure that support reaches a range of vulnerable groups, including those with disabilities, the elderly and isolated, children and victims of domestic violence or abuse, to help them apply to the EUSS, including to switch from pre-settled to settled status.

To read the full article, click here


Home Office paying for thousands of empty beds reserved for asylum seekers – The Guardian

The Home Office is paying for thousands of empty hotel beds reserved for people seeking asylum to avoid a repeat of dangerous overcrowding at a processing centre last year, MPs have heard. The move follows legal claims from hundreds of asylum seekers who were illegally held at the centre in November. The cases could result in payouts of millions of pounds.

To read the full article, click here


UK Home Office rejects Sudan asylum-seeker based on old data – Arab News

A Sudanese asylum-seeker attempting to flee his war-torn country to the UK was rejected by the Home Office based on outdated information, Metro newspaper reported. Authorities had used information from 2021, before the outbreak of the civil war, to judge the safety level of the country and make an asylum decision.

To read the full article, click here


Illegal Migration Bill is heading for parliamentary ‘ping pong’ – could the government make more concessions? – SKY News

The Illegal Migration Bill is heading back to the House of Lords, after MPs voted against almost all of the changes previously proposed by peers. The controversial legislation bans people from claiming asylum if they arrived in the UK illegally and puts a legal duty on the Home Office to remove them.

To read further analysis on the Bill’s current standing, click here


Thousands of couples face ‘humiliating’ Home Office sham marriage checks – Open Democracy

Thousands of couples hoping to tie the knot are being wrongly subjected to “humiliating” months-long investigations by the Home Office on suspicion of entering “sham marriages”. The checks often involve couples being hauled into immigration centres and grilled separately about the details of their relationship.

To read the full article, click here




Shyti v Secretary of State For The Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 770

Mr. Shyti lodged an appeal against the decision to revoke his British citizenship, which was based on section 40(3) of the British Nationality Act. This provision allows citizenship to be revoked if it was obtained through fraudulent means. The authorities have been increasingly employing this power to strip individuals of their citizenship.

Distinguishing from Sleiman (deprivation of citizenship: conduct) [2017] UKUT 00367 (IAC) , it was essential for the tribunal to thoroughly consider the decisions made by the Home Office, even if the appellant’s representative did not explicitly rely on them.  In Sleiman, the focus was solely on credibility, and the Presenting Officer selectively addressed only specific credibility issues during cross-examination. In that instance, the judge was not obligated to consider the unmentioned points.

Conversely, in Mr. Shyti’s situation, the decision to revoke his citizenship was based on various independent grounds, and the Presenting Officer failed to fulfill their duties adequately.

Elizabeth Laing LJ emphasized that comprehending the Home Office’s decision correctly revealed that the Sleiman case was not determinative. In Sleiman, the emphasis was on the Legacy grant, and it did not indicate that revealing the truth would have led to a denial of citizenship based on character grounds.

However, in Mr. Shyti’s case, the Home Office made such a suggestion, necessitating its examination by the First-tier Tribunal (FTT).

Consequently, the appeal lodged by Mr. Shyti was ultimately dismissed.

To read the full decision, click here


Ali, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1615 (Admin)

The High Court has ruled that the child of a European Union (EU) national can only remain in the United Kingdom (UK) after Brexit if they are below the age of 21 or financially reliant on their parent. In the case of R (on the application of Ali) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1615 (Admin), the court confirmed that the UK’s EU Settlement Scheme accurately reflects the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU.

Mr. Justice Lane highlighted that the European Court’s role is to respond to questions posed by national courts. He drew attention to Article 14(2) of the Directive, which states that family members are entitled to residence if they meet the specified conditions. This includes the requirement of being below the age of 21 or dependent to maintain the status of a “family member.”

Regarding the argument based on Article 17(2), Lane J acknowledged its initial appeal but concluded that, when considered in context, the phrase “before the end of the transition period” refers to the period immediately preceding December 31, 2020. It is insufficient to have been dependent at some point in the past. He also dismissed the argument that it was unreasonable for the Rules to treat Ms. Ali differently from a family member who did not possess a residence card before applying to the Settlement Scheme.

Since it was established that Ms. Ali was not financially reliant on her mother when she applied to the EU Settlement Scheme, her claim for a judicial review was rejected.

To read the full decision, click here




  • Transparency data: Migrants detected crossing the English Channel in small boats has been updated on 13th July 2023.  To view the latest report, click here


  • Policy paper National Security Bill: factsheets has been updated on 13th July 2023.  To view the Policy, click here


  • Ukraine Visa Schemes: visa data has been updated on 13th July 2023. To download the data, click here


  • Guidance: Piloting devolving decision making for child victims of modern slavery has been updated on 12th July 2023. To view the Guidance, click here


  • Application registration card (ARC) enquiry form has been updated , which can be viewed here  and latest Guidance on ARC can be viewed here


  • Statutory guidance on Modern slavery: how to identify and support victims has been updated. To view the Guidance, click here


  • Research and analysis – Methodology for the MAC shortage occupation list has been updated on 7th July 2023. To download the Report, click here


  • Updating the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme guidance has been updated on 7th July 2023. To view the Guidance, click here


  • Application for registration as a British citizen (form ARD) has been updated on 7th July 2023. To view the form, click here


  • Guidance EU Settlement Scheme: community support for vulnerable citizens has been updated on 6th July 2023. To view the Guidance, click here



Keep yourself up to date with the latest news please subscribe to our mailing list here 

Subscribe and receive updates of the happenings in the law & training events and £10 coupon!  

Your Cart