Podcasts about upper tribunal

​Jes Staley, the former CEO of Barclays, is currently challenging a ban imposed by the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) that prohibits him from holding senior positions in the financial sector. The FCA alleges that Staley misled regulators about the nature and extent of his relationship with the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Central to the FCA's case is a 2019 letter from Barclays to the FCA, which stated that Staley did not have a close relationship with Epstein and that their last contact occurred well before Staley joined Barclays in 2015. However, evidence presented by the FCA, including approximately 1,200 emails exchanged between Staley and Epstein from 2008 to 2012, suggests a closer relationship. In these emails, Staley referred to Epstein as "family" and "one of our deepest friends," contradicting the claims made in the 2019 letter.Staley's defense argues that Barclays was fully aware of his longstanding professional relationship with Epstein, asserting that the bank's board had been briefed on the matter. They contend that the 2019 letter to the FCA was intended solely to confirm that neither Staley nor Barclays had any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein's unlawful conduct, rather than to define the closeness of their relationship. The hearing, which commenced on March 3, 2025, at the Upper Tribunal in London, is expected to last two weeks. It will feature testimonies from prominent figures in the financial sector, including Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey and Barclays Chair Nigel Higgins. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for Staley's career and the broader financial industry, as it brings to light the responsibilities of senior executives in disclosing associations with controversial figures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein: This ex-CEO is risking all to clear his name over the paedophile

​Jes Staley, the former CEO of Barclays, is currently challenging a ban imposed by the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) that prohibits him from holding senior positions in the financial sector. The FCA alleges that Staley misled regulators about the nature and extent of his relationship with the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Central to the FCA's case is a 2019 letter from Barclays to the FCA, which stated that Staley did not have a close relationship with Epstein and that their last contact occurred well before Staley joined Barclays in 2015. However, evidence presented by the FCA, including approximately 1,200 emails exchanged between Staley and Epstein from 2008 to 2012, suggests a closer relationship. In these emails, Staley referred to Epstein as "family" and "one of our deepest friends," contradicting the claims made in the 2019 letter.Staley's defense argues that Barclays was fully aware of his longstanding professional relationship with Epstein, asserting that the bank's board had been briefed on the matter. They contend that the 2019 letter to the FCA was intended solely to confirm that neither Staley nor Barclays had any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein's unlawful conduct, rather than to define the closeness of their relationship. The hearing, which commenced on March 3, 2025, at the Upper Tribunal in London, is expected to last two weeks. It will feature testimonies from prominent figures in the financial sector, including Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey and Barclays Chair Nigel Higgins. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for Staley's career and the broader financial industry, as it brings to light the responsibilities of senior executives in disclosing associations with controversial figures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein: This ex-CEO is risking all to clear his name over the paedophileBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​Jes Staley, the former CEO of Barclays, is currently challenging a ban imposed by the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) that prohibits him from holding senior positions in the financial sector. The FCA alleges that Staley misled regulators about the nature and extent of his relationship with the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Central to the FCA's case is a 2019 letter from Barclays to the FCA, which stated that Staley did not have a close relationship with Epstein and that their last contact occurred well before Staley joined Barclays in 2015. However, evidence presented by the FCA, including approximately 1,200 emails exchanged between Staley and Epstein from 2008 to 2012, suggests a closer relationship. In these emails, Staley referred to Epstein as "family" and "one of our deepest friends," contradicting the claims made in the 2019 letter.Staley's defense argues that Barclays was fully aware of his longstanding professional relationship with Epstein, asserting that the bank's board had been briefed on the matter. They contend that the 2019 letter to the FCA was intended solely to confirm that neither Staley nor Barclays had any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein's unlawful conduct, rather than to define the closeness of their relationship. The hearing, which commenced on March 3, 2025, at the Upper Tribunal in London, is expected to last two weeks. It will feature testimonies from prominent figures in the financial sector, including Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey and Barclays Chair Nigel Higgins. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for Staley's career and the broader financial industry, as it brings to light the responsibilities of senior executives in disclosing associations with controversial figures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein: This ex-CEO is risking all to clear his name over the paedophile

In a bid to root out harm before it occurs, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is stepping up its use of intervention tools as an alternative to formal investigations. In this episode, we explain some quite draconian FCA powers – ‘voluntary requirements’ (VREQs) and ‘own initiative requirements’ (OIREQs) – and how these are impacting financial services firms. To tackle this thorny subject, we’ve gathered a crack team of specialists in financial services regulation. Host Nathan Willmott is joined by his Ashurst colleague Adam Jamieson and special guest Oliver Assersohn KC of XXIV Old Buildings. Together, they unpack how these intervention powers allow the FCA to impose restrictions on firms without formal investigations, often pressuring them into compliance within tight deadlines. The trio explain the legal thresholds for these requirements, the increasing willingness of the FCA to test these boundaries, and how firms are responding. As well as outlining the practicalities of negotiating with the FCA, our expert panel flags the risks for firms during interventions and the potential for challenging the requirements in the Upper Tribunal. To hear this (and to subscribe to future episodes in season two of our enforcement mini-series) search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts. The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Season 2 of our regulatory enforcement mini-series kicks off by considering what the 2025 priorities are (and should be) for the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA). With a busy year ahead for the PRA and FCA, this episode highlights some of the issues and trends that financial services firms should watch out for. For this episode, host Nathan Willmott is joined by his Ashurst colleague Adam Jamieson and special guest Saima Hanif KC, a barrister at 3 Verulam Buildings (3VB). Together, they discuss the Upper Tribunal’s packed caseload and the challenges for barristers and individuals seeking to argue these cases, including the impact of certain judges and the FCA's new strategy on disclosure. They also reflect on the FCA’s focus on speeding up investigations and streamlining its portfolio, consider how investigations are prioritised, and question whether or not it’s appropriate for the FCA to have a target for the proportion of investigations closed with no action. The conversation also tackles the vexed issue of the FCA’s penality-setting framework and what might be learned from the PRA’s approach. And finally, our expert panel flags up other issues that will shape 2025, such as the FCA’s revised proposals for naming and shaming (to be revisited in detail in a future episode), the rules around non-financial misconduct, and the prospect of a first Consumer Duty case. To listen to this and subscribe to future episodes in our enforcement mini-series, search for ‘Ashurst Legal Outlook’ on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts. The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week on the Tax Factor, Ele Theochari and Gabby Donald look at the latest tax stories in the news. These include a challenge surrounding VAT on school fees in relation to Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCP) from local authorities and a heads-up on the implementation of HMRC's ‘Making Tax Digital' initiative for Income Tax self-assessment. They also look at why the clock is ticking on a high-stakes Upper Tribunal anonymity application, with a pivotal deadline looming on 11 December.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week on the Tax Factor, Nimesh Shah and Roger Holman look at two HMRC stories in the news: the one penny tax demand and the National Audit Office's findings that HMRC tax helpline wait times are getting even longer. The Conservatives and Labour are fighting over tax numbers, but Nimesh and Roger are not really sure that any of them add up. And finally, how HMRC have asked the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal against the Upper Tribunal ruling on giant marshmallows!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In our December 2023 round up, Colin and Sonia discuss the latest developments with Home Office evictions and withdrawals, as well as the new Rwanda legislation. We also cover the government's five point plan to reduce net migration as well as the latest case law and Tribunal statistics. Asylum (01:00) What is in the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill? “These guarantees already existed”: the UK's new treaty with Rwanda Home Secretary must set out plan to eliminate use of hotels for lone refugee children Refugees can now claim Universal Credit without a biometric residence permit Asylum withdrawals guidance amended to halve time given to explain non-attendance at interview   Family immigration (19:03) Objective evidence must be considered when deciding “very significant obstacles” to integration In-country settlement applications for children and the different sole responsibility requirements What happens when relationships breakdown on the Hong Kong British National (Overseas) route?   General immigration (22:34) Statement of changes HC 246: rules finally amended to provide for victims of transnational marriage abandonment Supreme Court dismisses appeals in validity and continuous residence case Government attack on families as minimum income requirement to rise to £38,700 What should UK employers make of the government's five-point plan to reduce immigration?   EU settlement scheme (31:45) Article 8 not automatically engaged by a refusal under the EU settlement scheme Home Office unaware of the extent to which ‘mystery' stamp has been used to grant entry to UK in error   Citizenship (34:55) Deprivation of British citizenship without advance notice is lawful, says Upper Tribunal   Procedure (36:55) Court of Session agrees restricting judicial reviews of the Upper Tribunal is lawful Outstanding immigration tribunal appeals up 20% to 31,000 Court of Appeal: raising an entirely new issue in a determination for the first time is unfair   Detention (40:32) Home Office criticised by High Court for “five very concerning features” of detention case Are safeguards from the harm caused by immigration detention working?   Updated articles (43:16) What is the no recourse to public funds condition?   Free Movement (44:00) New OISC Level 2 training course in immigration and asylum law now available to members

Our November roundup is here, where Colin and I cover the latest asylum and trafficking statistics, changes to the way late applications to the EUSS are treated, questions the SRA still hasn't answered, a couple of articles on Palestinians as well as quite a lot of case law. Policy (00:45) Assessing Braverman's legacy as Home Secretary: Part Deux   Asylum (02:10) Latest statistics show huge increase in rejections of late EU settlement scheme applications, no evidence that Rwanda has impacted Channel crossings Briefing: four looming problems in the UK asylum system and how to address them Permission granted in challenge to rejection of Albanian asylum claim Returning a refugee to persecution must be a last resort India and Georgia to be added to the list of ‘safe' countries Gaza: what is the UK doing to rescue British citizens and their family members? Damages claim for asylum delay dismissed by Court of Appeal Upper Tribunal failed to properly assess whether error of law was material in asylum appeal   Immigration (16:10) Court of Appeal tells Home Office to reconsider “plainly wrong” decision on Turkish business person application Deception case returned to the Upper Tribunal after material error of law made Making sense of sole responsibility for child visas in immigration law   Deportation (19:10) Court of Appeal says deportation of mother of British child not “unduly harsh”   Nationality (20:45) Court of Appeal dismisses appeal on interpretation of nationality law   Trafficking (21:55) Latest trafficking figures show benefit of change in Home Office policy The UK must improve labour market enforcement in order to tackle exploitation of workers Increasing numbers of sponsored migrant workers are being exploited in the UK   EU Settlement Scheme (26:05) Important changes to the way late EUSS applications are treated Court of Appeal dismisses government appeal on access to benefits for people with pre settled status   Procedure (28:38) How to become an OISC level 2 adviser Government should not routinely remove names of civil servants in judicial review disclosure Guidance in Begum on deprivation decisions is not restricted to national security cases Solicitors Regulation Authority has questions to answer about their “warning” to immigration solicitors Late evidence from the Home Office can be admitted in an appeal where the appellant was aware of it   Updated article (34:30) Briefing: Article 1D of the Refugee Convention and Palestinian refugees

Compliance Clarified's first episode of season 9 brings together Alexander Robson, managing editor, Helen Parry, senior regulatory expert and Rachel Wolcott, senior editor to discuss the state of UK Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) enforcement and markets oversight division.Does it have "all bases covered" as Therese Chambers, its new co-executive director for enforcement said in a speech? Or is its approach and execution of enforcement cases, to use the words of an Upper Tribunal judge, "highly unsatisfactory"?Chambers and Steve Smart, the other co-executive director, have their work cut out for them. The 621-strong department is currently running 577 cases and 200 odd investigations. Cases are taking years to complete and a few recent Upper Tribunal judgments have gone against it and highlighted the department's errors and issues. Will the FCA close cases and focus, or open even more investigations?For more information about Regulatory Intelligence please see: www.legal.thomsonreuters.com/en/products/regulatory-intelligence Links:Julius Baer story: http://go-ri.tr.com/qQc7wABlueCrest storieshttp://go-ri.tr.com/qQc7wAhttp://go-ri.tr.com/0olu4Nhttp://go-ri.tr.com/fWunnjhttp://go-ri.tr.com/hGFF7rGopee judgment: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2023/881.htmlOutside the paywall:UK FCA closed 37 enforcement cases in Q1; new leadership faces big challenges https://regintel-content.thomsonreuters.com/document/I838002305C6911EEA33AE89A432BD9D5Contact us!Alexander.Robson@thomsonreuters.comHelen.Parry@thomsonreuters.comRachel.Wolcott@thomsonreuters.com Compliance Clarified is a podcast from Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence.Listen to wide-ranging, insightful discussions on all things compliance for financial services firms. We delve into the hot topics of the day, the challenges faced and offer up practical ideas for emerging good practice. We de-mystify regulation and explore the art, as well as the science, of the ever-expanding role of the compliance officer.  Enforcements, digital transformation, regulatory change, governance, culture, conduct risk – anything and everything impacting the compliance function is up for discussion.

Episode 4: Investigations Insights In this episode, Nik Kiri and Verity Kemp discuss the recent decision of the Upper Tribunal in relation to three individuals previously employed by Julius Baer, and its important implications. Further analysis of the case can be found on our blog post.

Episode 4: Investigations Insights In this episode, Nik Kiri and Verity Kemp discuss the recent decision of the Upper Tribunal in relation to three individuals previously employed by Julius Baer, and its important implications. Further analysis of the case can be found on our blog post.

This month Sonia and I talk a bit about denaturalisation generally and the case of Shamima Begum specifically, we cover the new streamlined asylum process and a few other asylum-related blog posts and then we run through a few cases. We manage to keep things a bit shorter than normal, but watch out for our coverage of the Illegal Migration Bill, which will be available separately. The 30-minute podcast follows the running order below. Denaturalisation Security tribunal finds Shamima Begum was trafficked but she loses anyway Book review: Stephanie DeGooyer's Before Borders: A legal and literary history of naturalization Bad cases make bad law: the unintended consequences of denaturalising bad guys Deception and denaturalisation: seek and you shall find Asylum Latest asylum stats show the Home Office failing on all fronts New streamlined asylum process Does 10 year ‘temporary refugee protection' status breach of the Refugee Convention? New policy: temporary permission to stay for victims of human trafficking Trafficking victims should get leave during their asylum claim Cases Immigration officers don't have to corroborate your story No damages for unlawful no recourse to public funds policy Differential treatment of Ukrainian and Afghan applications justified on national security grounds Not all procedural errors need to be remitted says Upper Tribunal More bad news from the Upper Tribunal for extended family members of EU citizens

Jess Harrold is joined by Roger Cohen, senior counsel at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, to discuss the latest decision in Ludgate House Ltd v Ricketts (valuation officer) and London Borough of Southwark – a dispute over the impact of the use of property guardians on empty rates. Having failed to convince the Court of Appeal in 2020 that the occupation of its premises by property guardians meant it was not liable for non-domestic rates, Ludgate House Ltd turned its attention to how the rates should be calculated. Now, Cohen explains the Upper Tribunal's reasoning on that matter, and what it means for the rating of premises with property guardians. In addition, he surveys the field of potential rates mitigation measures for empty properties in the wake of the decisions in Ludgate House.

Welcome to episode 100 of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month we've got some pretty major asylum stuff to go over plus quite a few different topics, including compensation for unlawful removal, the unending saga of the English language tests, new immigration fees, changes to work visas, a big case from the Upper Tribunal on expert evidence and a rather unusual case in the Court of Appeal on deportation. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a Free Movement member. There are now over 100 CPD hours of training materials available to members. You can find all...

About Primerose Chiguri: Primerose Chiguri (nee Makunzva) LLB (hons) LLM, is a Solicitor at Kimberly Wayne & Diamond Solicitors in London. Her experience is in Immigration, Family Law , Civil Litigation and Wills and Probate. Primerose specialises in complex cases and she prides herself in achieving high success rates for her clients and making a difference. She represents clients in Judicial Review applications as well as in appeals before the First Tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal and in other civil matters in the County courts. Primerose believes in excellence in legal service and providing a high quality, professional service whilst maintaining a personal touch in each case. She is an on demand speaker and enjoys empowering others through raising awareness on legal issues. Primerose enjoys playing her piano, hiking, travelling, writing legal articles and spending time with friends and family. Key discussion points in this episode: · Why Primrose decided to become a lawyer - 3:37 · Why it is important to start thinking about setting up a will – 6:24 · How a will can protect your children – 14:27 · A breakdown of the Statutory Order of Inheritance for England and Wales – 18:41 · When you should start the process of setting up a will – 21:58 · The cost of setting up a will – 26:54 · Why you should review your will – 30:12 · Primerose's advise to anyone considering not putting a will in place because they have or will tell their wishes to those close to them – 32:01 · Primerose's definition of the Wealth Cornerstones – 36:56 Contact and work with Primerose Chiguri: Email: pchiguri@kwdsolictors.co.uk LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/primerose-chiguri-baaa3392/ Follow The Wealth Conversation: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thewealthconversation Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thewealthconversation/ Connect with Tsitsi at www.thewealthconversation.com

Episode 11: Non-financial misconduct and whistleblowing In this podcast episode we discuss the Upper Tribunal's Frensham decision and the important guidance it provides on when non-financial misconduct involving a lack of personal integrity can impact on an individual's fitness and propriety to perform a financial services role. This episode features Clare McMullen and Nik Kiri (partners, Financial Regulation, London) and Gavin Lewis (partner, Dispute Resolution, London). For more detail, see our commentary and complete note on the decision.  And for more insights on non-financial misconduct and whistleblowing including a global comparative review and our other podcast episodes, visit our webpage.

Episode 11: Non-financial misconduct and whistleblowing In this podcast episode we discuss the Upper Tribunal's Frensham decision and the important guidance it provides on when non-financial misconduct involving a lack of personal integrity can impact on an individual's fitness and propriety to perform a financial services role. This episode features Clare McMullen and Nik Kiri (partners, Financial Regulation, London) and Gavin Lewis (partner, Dispute Resolution, London). For more detail, see our commentary and complete note on the decision.  And for more insights on non-financial misconduct and whistleblowing including a global comparative review and our other podcast episodes, visit our webpage.

Twelve years on from the seismic changes to the UK tax appeals system that introduced the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal, the Tax Law Review Committee (TLRC) has published its Report "The tax tribunals: the next 10 years".Intended to be a review of how the tax tribunal system has operated and providing recommendations for changes required for the next 10 years, the Report considers a number of important issues, including access to justice, unacceptable delay and certain tactics deployed by HMRC in an attempt to game the system.In this episode, we are delighted to be joined by Dr Michael Blackwell, TLRC committee member and Associate Professor of Tax Law at the London School of Economics, to discuss the Report's findings. References· The Tax Law Review Committee· The tax tribunals: the next 10 years See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Welcome to episode 89 of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month is a bit of a bumper episode, so we may hurry through some updates to keep it a manageable length, but you can read more about each item at the links below. We start with a couple of rather concerning court cases involving massive Home Office delays before turning to immigration policy. We're then off to the Upper Tribunal to discuss a series of new decisions on family migration and the conduct of immigration appeals, before ending with a couple of quick coronavirus updates. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and...

Welcome to episode 89 of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month is a bit of a bumper episode, so we may hurry through some updates to keep it a manageable length, but you can read more about each item at the links below. We start with a couple of rather concerning court cases involving massive Home Office delays before turning to immigration policy. We're then off to the Upper Tribunal to discuss a series of new decisions on family migration and the conduct of immigration appeals, before ending with a couple of quick coronavirus updates. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and...

The first episode in our podcast series focuses on privacy applications in Financial Services litigation. Saima Hanif QC and Emmanuel Sheppard discuss a recent Upper Tribunal in which Emmanuel appeared, as well as other cases on this issue.

This week we are joined by Mark Southgate, the CEO of George Clarke's educational charity, MOBIE. He is also a member of the RTPI General Assembly. Court Judgments of the Week The Open Spaces Society v Secretary of State EF&RA EWCA [2021] Civ 241; the Court of Appeal dismissing an appeal against a decision of Lieven J which had confirmed that an inspector had not made an error of law when concluding it was expedient to confirm a footpath diversion order under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980. Leech Homes Limited v Northumberland County Council [2021] EWCA Civ 198; a decision of the Court of Appeal on an appeal from the Upper Tribunal raising issues about a CAAD & the basis of compensation of land, situated in the Green Belt, where the Council had no 5 yr HLS, acquired by compulsory purchase. Cheshire East v Mahoney et al [2021] EWHC 350; a decision ofMr Justice Turner in proceedings for contempt & seeking permanent injunctions prohibiting the occupation of land by members of the travelling community following the earlier grants of planning injunctions under section 187B of the 1990 T&CPA. Plus “Praise of the Week” and “Nudge of the Week”

Following the Upper Tribunal’s recent decision in Brickfield Properties, we look at the requirements in some leases to place insurance in joint names. Joining Cassandra on this expert podcast is Paul Robertson, Director of 1st Sure Flats and author of Robertson’s Principles of Insurance for Leasehold Flats. Together, Cassandra and Paul look back at the previous Upper […]

Welcome to episode 71 of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month we explain the ramifications of the Supreme Court decision in Hemmati as well as recent developments in asylum and trafficking. The DeSouza case on the Good Friday Agreement has been reported by the Upper Tribunal, along with a bunch of procedural cases. Finally, we look at the latest in deportation law from the Court of Appeal. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a Free Movement member. There are now over 100 CPD hours of training materials available to members. You can find all the available...

Welcome to episode 71 of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month we explain the ramifications of the Supreme Court decision in Hemmati as well as recent developments in asylum and trafficking. The DeSouza case on the Good Friday Agreement has been reported by the Upper Tribunal, along with a bunch of procedural cases. Finally, we look at the latest in deportation law from the Court of Appeal. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a Free Movement member. There are now over 100 CPD hours of training materials available to members. You can find all the available...

What role does medical evidence play in a legal battle? On the one hand medical practitioners bring their own clinical expertise to a case but the final decision rests with the judge. In this case the Upper Tribunal went against the medical evidence and it was up to the Supreme Court to decide the extent to which they had the right to do so. Music from bensound.com

Welcome to the delayed January 2019 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. We start the round-up with some mixed news on appeal rights before getting into the latest on Brexit and the Settlement Scheme for EU citizens living in the UK. There is some significant new guidance on good character in the context of British citizenship applications to chew over and then some business immigration updates. Finally we fly through a few cases from the Upper Tribunal, in particular on asylum. Listen to the end to hear why the 10-year residence rule requires 10 years of lawful residence — the answer may not surprise you. If you would...

Welcome to the delayed January 2019 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. We start the round-up with some mixed news on appeal rights before getting into the latest on Brexit and the Settlement Scheme for EU citizens living in the UK. There is some significant new guidance on good character in the context of British citizenship applications to chew over and then some business immigration updates. Finally we fly through a few cases from the Upper Tribunal, in particular on asylum. Listen to the end to hear why the 10-year residence rule requires 10 years of lawful residence — the answer may not surprise you. If you would...

Welcome to the December 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. It's a bumper issue, with a host of immigration announcements just before Christmas to cover, including two sets of changes to the Immigration Rules, a white paper, an Immigration Bill and announcements on EU citizens' rights. We run through the main policy and procedural changes for lawyers to be aware of before turning to some case law on asylum and detention, as well as all the Upper Tribunal's reported decisions for this month — all in just 25 minutes. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as...

Welcome to the December 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. It’s a bumper issue, with a host of immigration announcements just before Christmas to cover, including two sets of changes to the Immigration Rules, a white paper, an Immigration Bill and announcements on EU citizens’ rights. We run through the main policy and procedural changes for lawyers to be aware of before turning to some case law on asylum and detention, as well as all the Upper Tribunal’s reported decisions for this month — all in just 25 minutes. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as...

Welcome to the November 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month we again take it from the top with the Supreme Court's latest attempt to cut through the complexity of our immigration law before turning to a major High Court decision on trafficking. November also saw the Home Office roll out a new in-country application system, so we'll discuss what we know about that so far. There's then some Upper Tribunal case law on appeals, asylum and Article 3 to chew on, and we conclude on the now-infamous paragraph 322(5). If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this...

Welcome to the October 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. We posted 40 articles on the blog last month, but are realistically limited in a podcast to discussing the most important ten or so. A Supreme Court judgment obviously qualifies, so we start with that one on how the best interests of children factor into removal decisions before turning to another case involving children, this time in the Upper Tribunal. There's also a set of changes to the Immigration Rules to mug up on. Most of the rest of this month's update is case law, of which the most significant case may be on Surinder Singh rights....

Nicholas shares his insights on sitting as a part-time judge in the tax tribunals adjudicating on disputes between taxpayers and HMRC. He is a deputy judge of the Upper Tribunal and a judge of the First-tier Tribunal.

Richard Goldstein looks at the recent decision in the Box Clever case in which the Upper Tribunal held that it was reasonable for the Pensions Regulator to issue financial support directions in connection with the failure of a joint venture.

Welcome to the March 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month I start on the Brexit outlook for EU citizens before turning to several immigration law issues affecting children that came to light in March. The Upper Tribunal reported a fresh batch of decisions, a couple on its jurisdiction and some more on other procedural bits and pieces. I end on a couple of cases and developments in the area of business immigration. The material is all drawn from the March 2018 blog posts on Free Movement. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a...

Welcome to the February 2018 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month I look at some legal developments with Brexit and review no less than three Supreme Court decisions on immigration, nationality and detention. There have also been some case law on the Points Based System, which I look at alongside the worrying trend in Tier 2 visa applicants being turned away. There are a couple of new Court of Appeal and Upper Tribunal authorities touching on procedure that are worth being aware of, and a few other cases in a range of different areas, all important in their own way. The material is all drawn from...

Welcome to the October 2017 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month we look at a load of cases from Strasbourg, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and of course the Upper Tribunal. These cases range from the sublime, including private religious worship, trafficking and torture, to the ridiculous. I end by taking a look at a couple of examples of media coverage of Home Office decisions and the harsh rules the coverage highlights. The material is all drawn from the October 2017 blog posts on Free Movement. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a...

Welcome to the September 2017 edition of the Free Movement immigration update podcast. This month covers several cases, one from the Court of Appeal and the others from the Upper Tribunal. I'm also going to give a mention to some of our new explainers on different aspects of immigration law and take a look at the case of Samim Bigzad, whose case highlighted the law on contempt of court for a government minister. The material is all drawn from the September 2017 blog posts on Free Movement. If you would like to claim CPD points for reading the material and listening to this podcast, sign up here as a Free Movement member. There are...