- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix
Hi Vinnyvinny wrote:If you had previously properly checked valid List A documents, then there's no requirement for you to recheck. Moreover, for a British passport, it doesn't even have to be current at the time of the initial check.
I will meet him again soon to ask him this again in more detail.vinny wrote:I can understand the extra parent's information requirement regarding the birth certificates for people born from Jan 1983.
However, can he point to the specific immigration rules or guidance that implies that the normal statutory excuse for employers is insufficient for a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Employer?
Hi Jafer, Thank you for your input. But I think in your message in response to my PM you had mentioned that the passport should be valid throughout employment. Would it be possible to share the link for that?jafersadeq wrote:Check:
https://www.gov.uk/legal-right-work-uk
There are no requirements in this link about passport expiry.
The validity meaning in the link you mentioned is " Does the passport false or not" it is not about expiry date,
vinny wrote:However, can he point to the specific immigration rules or guidance that implies that the normal statutory excuse for employers is insufficient for a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Employer?
Hi Vinnyvinny wrote:vinny wrote:However, can he point to the specific immigration rules or guidance that implies that the normal statutory excuse for employers is insufficient for a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Employer?
My unanswered question was that can he point to where they wrote that an entrepreneur employer applicant must do more than just meet the basic requirements to establish a statutory excuse for a settled employee?sm12 wrote:Yes, I did bring that up, but he reiterated that to prove someone was settled throughout the employment, the applicant must do more than just meet the basic requirements to establish a statutory excuse.
Syed, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 1059 (07 September 2011) wrote:It is thus in the nature of the Immigration Rules that they include no over-arching implicit purposes. Their only purpose is to articulate the Secretary of State's specific policies with regard to immigration control from time to time, as to which there are no presumptions, liberal or restrictive. The whole of their meaning is, so to speak, worn on their sleeve...
Yes, when I asked him where the guidance stated what he was saying, he again gave the example that the right to work guidance only asks for a birth certificate and NI document to prove right to work, but the entrepreneur guidance asks for more information for people born after 1983. He said that just like with the birth certificate, where you must provide additional documents for the Tier 1 extension/ILR than would be needed as per the right to work guidance, you have to apply with a current passport copy for employees, and that if the employee is an ex-employee, then apply with a passport copy covering the entire period of employment.vinny wrote:My unanswered question was that can he point to where they wrote that an entrepreneur applicant must do more than just meet the basic requirements to establish a statutory excuse for a settled employee?sm12 wrote:Yes, I did bring that up, but he reiterated that to prove someone was settled throughout the employment, the applicant must do more than just meet the basic requirements to establish a statutory excuse.
Syed, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 1059 (07 September 2011) wrote:It is thus in the nature of the Immigration Rules that they include no over-arching implicit purposes. Their only purpose is to articulate the Secretary of State's specific policies with regard to immigration control from time to time, as to which there are no presumptions, liberal or restrictive. The whole of their meaning is, so to speak, worn on their sleeve...
However, a British passport is not a birth certificate. Where do they state that a settled employee's British passport must be current?sm12 wrote:...you have to apply with a current passport copy for employees, and that if the employee is an ex-employee, then apply with a passport copy covering the entire period of employment.
NO it does not ! This only is relevant if the applicant chooses to send the birth certificate instead of a passport copy.Yes, when I asked him where the guidance stated what he was saying, he again gave the example that the right to work guidance only asks for a birth certificate and NI document to prove right to work, but the entrepreneur guidance asks for more information for people born after 1983.
Hi Vinnyvinny wrote:Yes. I agree the Rules and Guidance now require more documents than the statutory excuse, relating to a settled employee's birth certificate. I expect they will amend the statutory excuse in due course.
However, a British passport is not a birth certificate. Where do they state that a settled employee's British passport must be current?sm12 wrote:...you have to apply with a current passport copy for employees, and that if the employee is an ex-employee, then apply with a passport copy covering the entire period of employment.
Hi Zimbazimba88 wrote:NO it does not ! This only is relevant if the applicant chooses to send the birth certificate instead of a passport copy.Yes, when I asked him where the guidance stated what he was saying, he again gave the example that the right to work guidance only asks for a birth certificate and NI document to prove right to work, but the entrepreneur guidance asks for more information for people born after 1983.
He should have raised these same questions with the UKVI. If they also cannot point to any specific rules nor guidance nor other legalisation implying the necessity of an employee's British passport being current, then such a requirement may be beyond the scope of the Immigration rules and therefore unlawful.sm12 wrote:Yes, I did ask him, and he said that the passport had to be current. It doesn't say so on the guidance, but he said that this was required as per his experience. He is from a leading law firm, otherwise I wouldn't have given it so much though.