Since the sharp economic downturn in 2008, European countries have increasingly turned to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to help sustain and develop fragmented economies across the continent. As such, various European countries including Spain, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus and Malta introduced Citizenship by Investment (CIP) programmes to attract this much-needed foreign investment by offering ‘golden visas’ to foreign nationals. These schemes typically involve investment in real estate and government bonds and shares in exchange for residency or citizenship.
Last week the Home Office issued revised guidance surrounding the Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) route for the second time this year. Whilst we covered the earlier changes to this route briefly in a general posting on the rule changes in December , this article will discuss these changes in more detail and also examine the effect of the latest revised guidance.
Amongst the barrage of stories stemming from the current scandal surrounding the Windrush generation, it is worth remarking on what implications may arise with respect to a separate group of those arriving in the UK with a similar right to work and settle, Europeans.
Demand from employers for Tier 2 visas to enable them to employ skilled non-EU workers exceeded the cap imposed by the UK Government again in March, making it the fourth month in a row that demand for these visas has outstripped supply.
In opinion of the Court of Justice,C 89/17 Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rozanne Banger , Advocate General Bobek held that where an EU citizen returns to his Member State of origin, that Member State must facilitate the entry and residence of the citizen’s non EU partner with whom he has created or strengthened family ties in another Member State. The requirement to facilitate does not confer an automatic residence right but does require the Member State to undertake an extensive examination of the personal circumstances of the non EU citizen and justify any refusal of entry or residence.
The Court of Appeal ruled on 3 conjoined cases in December 2017 where the key question was whether the Zambrano principle had been extended by the CJEU decision of Chavez - Vilchez. Case C-133/15 which found that a third-country national may, as the parent of a minor child who is an EU citizen, rely on a derived right of residence in the EU.
A lack of clarity over what the UK’s post-Brexit immigration policy will look like is causing uncertainty for businesses across the UK and also concern over how any future policy might impact on their workforce, new reports have revealed. The uncertainty is also prompting different interest groups to put forward their own views on what the country’s future immigration system should look like.
As outlined in our posting on August 16 2017, last summer the Government commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee to assess and report on the current likely future patterns of EEA migration and the impacts of that migration on the UK after Brexit. After hearing evidence, including that of McGill & Co, the Committee has now published a summary of the some, but not all, of the responses in the interim MAC report. With the final report due to be delivered in September 2018, this article will summarise the findings of the Committee so far.
Last week the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) published a policy review setting out their recommendations for the Government on the topic of immigration post-Brexit. Of the many proposals, CaSE suggested:
The Campaign for Science and Engineering ( CaSE) has called on the UK Government to develop a post-Brexit immigration system that contributes to the UK being a global hub for science and engineering so that the country can reap the associated economic and social benefits.
Average rating for
Our Testimonials, McGill & Co is
4.99 Star of 5 stars - based on
03/06/21 Via Google
I contacted McGill &Co when my citizenship application ran into difficulties which I struggled to sort out myself. I was very impressed by Iain Halliday who helped me secure it. His kind professionalism and knowledge of immigration law, the speedy email responses and the final letter of representation confirmed that it was the right decision to engage this law firm and in future, I will have no reservations recommending them to anyone who struggles with immigration matters.
03/06/21 Via Google
03 June 2021
31/05/21 Via Google
A very professional and trustworthy firm. My husband and I worked with Amna, who was consistently reliable, precise, transparent, and just generally pleasant as a person throughout the application process. We have to thank Amna for providing additional support beyond her office hours in order to help us meet certain deadlines! We got a decision rather quickly after Amna submitted our application. You would not regret having your case handled by them!
31/05/21 Via Google
01 June 2021
15/05/21 via Google
I was very impressed with the services I received from McGill & Co, specifically James Ritchie, Solicitor. He was very professional and knowledgeable. He took the time to walk me through the process and kept me informed of the status of my application. He was very prompt with his responses to my queries and thorough with his follow up. James made a complex matter very simple to complete. I highly recommend him.