By Vishal Makol of OTS Solicitors
A small change to the immigration and Asylum Chamber Tribunal Procedure Rules which came into effect on 14th May 2018 may have quite a big impact on the time limits that apply to appeals to the Upper Tribunal.
Until recently, Rule 33 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (immigration and Asylum Chamber) Rules 2014 essentially meant that an application for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal had to be made within 14 days of receiving the written decision of the First Tier Tribunal (28 days if the appellant was outside the UK). The wording has been changed so that instead of referring to the appellant being ‘provided with’ the written decision, it now refers to the appellant being ‘sent the’ written decision.
This shifts the date when the time limits for appeal starts to run from the date the appellant receives the written decision of the First Tier Tribunal to the date the decision is sent by the First Tier Tribunal. The crucial date all immigration Appeal Solicitors must now bear in mind is the postage date, not the date of receipt of the decision. To do otherwise risks appeals being submitted out of time.
As most Immigration Lawyers in London and the UK will recognise, this introduces some uncertainty and potentially reduces the amount of time appellants and their representatives will have to appeal. Postage delays, particularly for appellants outside the UK, may reduce the time available to compile a robust application for appeal.
Aligning with First Tier Tribunal time limits
Of course, this is something that experienced Immigration Solicitors are already dealing with in respect of appeals to the First Tier Tribunal. The change to Rule 33 does introduce consistency on the time limits for appeals between the First Tier and Upper Tribunals. Unfortunately, rather than levelling ‘up’ and changing Rule 19 – which sets time running from the date a claimant is sent the notice of the decision - the change represents a levelling down. We can only hope that a similar situation does not develop in respect of Rule 33 as it did in respect of Rule 19, when decisions were sent out by the Home Office using second class post. As Free Movement have reported, that led to the immigration law Practitioners Association to complain.
If you are looking for a team of London immigration appeal lawyers to assist you with your current application or appeal against a Home Office decision in respect of your immigration status, get in touch with us at OTS Solicitors. We are recommended in the Legal 500 for immigration and human rights matters and can advise on every aspect of your immigration status or visa application.
For the best expert legal advice and outcome on your UK immigration application, contact OTS Immigration Solicitors on 0203 959 9123 or contact us online.
We are one of the UK’s top firms for Immigration Solicitors and civil liberties lawyers. We can advise on a broad range of immigration issues including Appeals and Refusals, Judicial Reviews, spouse visas, Student Visas, Work Permit Visas, Indefinite Leave to Remain, EEA Applications, Asylum and human rights, British Citizenship, All types of visas, Business Immigration Visas, entrepreneur visas and Investor Visas.
Our top Immigration Solicitors and lawyers are here to assist you.
Disclaimer: The information and comments on this page/site is made available free of charge and for educational and information purposes only. The information and comments do not amount to and are not intended to be adopted as legal advice to any individual or company. The use of this site should not be a substitute for specific legal advice, which we ask you to see our contact page or call our solicitors on 0203 959 9123.
By using this site you understand that there is no solicitor and client relationship between you/your company and the site owners or the firm. We make every effort to keep the published articles up-to-date and accurate, however the law changes very rapidly and the older the articles on this site, the more likely that the views in it have changed with the development of the law.
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May, 2018