Home > Expertise > Public > Immigration

Immigration

Landmark is ranked by the legal directories as a leading set for immigration law. We advise and represent individuals, companies, central government and other public authorities on all aspects of immigration law. Areas of expertise include:

  • EU free movement law
  • Personal immigration
  • Business immigration
  • Sponsor licensing
  • Detention
  • Asylum
  • ECHR-based protection claims
  • Deportation
  • Legal aid

There is immense breadth of experience in Chambers, with leading silks and well-known juniors in our team. We appear at all levels from the First-tier and Upper Tribunals to acting in some of the most significant cases of recent years at Supreme Court level, in the Court of Justice of the European Union, and in the European Court of Human Rights.

Issues flowing from a person’s immigration status arise in a range of public law contexts including community care entitlements, social security, access to healthcare and access to student funding. As a leading multi-disciplinary public law set we are in a position to draw on a wide range of expertise where immigration issues overlap with or impinge on other areas of law.

EU Free Movement Law

Landmark’s barristers have unparalleled expertise in the field of EU Free Movement law, having acted both for and against the government in many leading cases before the domestic courts and the CJEU. As a result we are particularly well placed to advise individuals, businesses and other organisations on the potential implications of Brexit and to assist in Brexit-related litigation as it begins to arise.

Personal and business immigration (including British citizenship and naturalisation)

As a large commercially focused chambers with a broad interdisciplinary practice we are very well placed to advise businesses and individuals on complex personal and business immigration issues, as well as more routine matters. We can offer advice and representation in applications made under the rules relating to spouses, civil partners, unmarried partners and children. We also routinely advise on applications under the Points Based System including Tier 1 (Entrepreneur), Tier 1 (Investor), Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent), Tier 2 (workers), Tier 4 (students), and Tier 5 (temporary workers and youth mobility). We have been involved in many of the leading cases on the interpretation of the Immigration Rules. There is particular expertise in Chambers in the complex area of nationality law. We also have niche expertise in the field of sponsor licensing.

Asylum and human rights

Chambers has a long history of providing advice in asylum and human rights cases, with barristers having appeared in many of the leading cases of the past decades. We act for legally aided and privately funded individuals and for central government at all levels of the appellate system.

In the asylum sphere, there is a broad range of legal and country expertise in Chambers. Our barristers have appeared in a number of “Country Guideline” asylum cases in the Upper Tribunal, including in relation to Eritrea, Iran and Serbia and Montenegro. We have particular experience in issues relating to exclusion from refugee protection and cessation of refugee status.

Barristers have appeared in many of the leading cases on Article 8 ECHR at House of Lords and Supreme Court level, and we are often called upon to act in cases raising private and family life issues.

Immigration detention and claims against the Home Office

Landmark is well-known for its work in the area of immigration detention acting for both Claimants and the government. The leading textbook “Detention Under the Immigration Acts” (OUP, 2014) was co-authored by a member of the team. We provide regular training in this area for law firms and NGOs. We have acted in many of the leading cases in this area in recent years.

Our barristers have acted in many of the most significant immigration cases of recent years including:

  • DN (Rwanda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 273 (Court of Appeal) – the relevance of public law errors in immigration decisions to decisions to detain;
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v Robinson (Jamaica) [2018] EWCA Civ 85 (Court of Appeal) – approach to deportation of a third country national with an EU dependent child;
  • R (Taste of India) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWHC 414 (Admin) (High Court) – Tier 2 sponsor licencing;
  • R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] 1 W.L.R. 221 (Supreme Court) – misrepresentations in nationality applications;
  • Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 2028 (Court of Appeal) – the impact of the decision of the CJEU in Chavez-Vilchez v Raad van Bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank [2018] Q.B. 103 on the approach in Ruiz Zambrano v Office National de l’Emploi [2012] Q.B. 265;
  • Taskiran v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 2679 (Admin) (High Court) – lawfulness of detention where the proposed country of return had purported to revoke the Claimant’s nationality;
  • R (SG) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 433; [2017] 1 W.L.R. 4567 (Court of Appeal) – asylum support, best interests of the child;
  • Kiarie and Byndloss v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42; [2017] 1 W.L.R. 2380 (Supreme Court) – lawfulness of certificates issued under the “deport first appeal later” provisions in section 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002;
  • R (Williams) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] 1 WLR 3283 (Court of Appeal) – Whether requiring destitute children to pay a fee before obtaining British citizenship is ultra vires and/or a breach of Article 8 and/or 14 ECHR;
  • MM (Lebanon)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 10; [2017] 1 W.L.R. 771 (Supreme Court) – lawfulness of the minimum income requirements imposed in relation to non-EEA spouses of UK residents;
  • R (Iqbal) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 63; [2017] 1 W.L.R. 85 (Supreme Court) – application of s.3C of the Immigration Act 1971 where application to vary leave not properly made;
  • XEM v Home Office [2016] EWHC 2622 (QB) (High Court) – when a second claim for unlawful detention damages is an abuse of process;
  • R (TH and ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 815 (Court of Appeal) – the lawfulness of the Detained Asylum Casework policy;
  • Rhuppiah v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] 1 WLR 4203 – Part 5A of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002;
  • R (MA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] 1 WLR 5093 – the correct approach in law to when it is reasonable to remove a child from the United Kingdom under Immigration Rule 296ADE(1)(iv);
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v A (AIRE Centre intervening) [2017] Q.B. 109 (CJEU);
  • SSH and HR (illegal exit: failed asylum seeker) Iran CG [2016] UKUT 308 (Upper Tribunal) – Iranian Country Guidance case;
  • R (AA (Sudan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 1453 (Admin); [2017] 1 W.L.R. 145 (High Court) – whether age a question of objective fact for the purposes of Immigration Act 1971 Sch.2 para.18B;
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v Vassallo [2016] EWCA Civ 13; [2016] 2 C.M.L.R. 12; [2016] Imm. A.R. 613; [2016] – EU law; continuity of residence for the purpose of acquiring permanent residence;
  • Idira v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] 1 WLR 1694 – conditions of detention / Article 5 ECHR.
icon-accordion-chevron icon-arrow-left icon-arrow-right icon-chevron-down icon-chevron-left icon-cross icon-download icon-letter icon-linked-in icon-phone-outline icon-phone icon-search icon-search icon-select-chevron icon-top-right-corner icon-twitter