CALL US NOW ON 0121 356 4556
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Facebook

J.M. Wilson Solicitors has excelled in providing expert legal assistance since 1991. Highly professional staff are friendly and offering expertise in:
• Property  • Immigration, Asylum & Human Rights  • Criminal & Civil Litigation  • Wills and Probate  • Public Law  • Family Law
Buying & Selling Property
Immigration & Asylum
  • Human Rights
  • Criminal & Civil Litigation
  • Wills and Probate
  • Public Law
  • Specialist Family Law
    2 Easy Steps To Find
    The Right Solictor
    • Call 0121 356 4556 or fill in the form
    • Your chosen specialist solicitor calls you
    Quick Enquiry Form
     
    Captcha plugin for Joomla from Outsource Online

    High Profile Cases

    R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department


    J M Wilson is once again taking forward an appeal to the Supreme Court.
    The Court has granted permission to appeal in the case R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department.
    The case challenges the interpretation of the deport first, appeal later part of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
    Mr Byndloss is challenging his deportation because it would be in breach of his right to private and/or family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
    Full case details are available at: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2015/1020.html
    The hearing will take place on 15 and 16 February 2017.

    MM and Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department (TEST CASE ON THE MINIMUM FINANCIAL REQUIREMENT FOR SPOUSES)

    J.M. Wilson Solicitors is once again leading the way in challenging the Government’s change to the Immigration Rules on the 9th July 2012 when it introduced a minimum amount a person can earn before they can bring their spouse to the UK.
    In this particular case that J.M. Wilson Solicitors are taking forward to the Supreme Court the person in the UK is a Lebanese national, now in his mid-thirties who came to the UK in 2001. He is a refugee and had leave to remain in the United Kingdom until January 2014. He has since been granted further limited leave to remain in the UK until 16 June 2017.
    This affects his ability to obtain high paid employment. The rule also affects British Nationals and any other residents with settled leave who earn the National Minimum Wage because even if they work a full week they will still not meet the income requirement.
    Since the start of these proceedings, MM and his fiancée have met twice in Cyprus on visit visas and in January 2013 married by proxy in Lebanon. Despite working every hour he can, MM does not earn the required amount to bring his wife to the UK in accordance with the requirements set out in the Immigration Rules. This challenge is based on the legality of these rules, as they are both discriminatory and a breach of Article 8, the right to family life. There has been a lot of criticism of the Government’s introduction of this new requirement and it is said it is further attempt to stop migration to the UK.
    The first judgement was that the Minimum Income Requirement (MIR) constituted an unjustified interference with affected couples’ Article 8 rights. This decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court will now again look at whether the MIR is unlawfully discriminatory and/or irrational.

    The MM Case was heard at the Supreme Court between 22 and 24 February. We feel that the hearing went well and the Home Office were on the back foot on a number of points, in particular whether the policy was reviewed in April 2015 when it should have been and why third party support and the spouse’s prospective earnings could not be considered.

    You can watch the hearing back on the Supreme Court website https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2015-0011.html

    In summing up Lady Hale said that there was a lot  of information to work through and “such a lot of food for thought and therefore “it will take us some time to consider what our decision will be.” So for now all we can do is wait to hear when the judgement will be made.  We will keep you up to date with the timescale.

    For further information please contact Sanjeev Sharma on 0121 356 4556 or by email on  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it


    Chapti v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2011)

    Mrs Chapti (a British citizen) wanted her husband to come from India and join her in Britain. Mrs Chapti submits that the Immigration Rule that spouses must know English before entering the U.K. discriminates on grounds of race and nationality and breaches their Human Rights. The High Court decision is due in October 2011. Click HERE for more info.

    R (Ghai) v Newcastle City Council [2010] ECWA Civ 59

    The Court of Appeal declared a British Hindu was entitled to receive an 'open air' funeral pyre cremation, in accordance with his religious beliefs. Click HERE for further details and media profile.

    EM (Lebanon) (Fe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008J UKHL 64

    A Lebanese Muslim woman and her son fled their Country on the understanding that all Islamic divorce her entitled her to retain custody of the son. Under Sharia Law, the son had to return to the father when reaching the age of 7 but the Court found that would breach her human rights to enjoy the family life she had developed in the UK. See The Times and Weekly Law Report for further· details or click HERE.

    Acted for Muslim Woman In Niqab Ban Appeal

    http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/people/my-legal-life/acted-for-muslim-woman-in-niqab-ban-appeal/5042145.article