WEB 1255 Arguing Insurmountable Obstacles under Appendix FM (Webinar)

Level: Basic – Intermediate

Description:

In this webinar, we will look at the harsh test that applies to foreign nationals who are here as overstayers and make applications as partners under Appendix FM EX.1(b) and EX.2 of the Immigration Rules. We will consider recent authorities and how these have clarified the test. There will be a detailed look at policy guidance, practical tips and examples. This webinar will allow more effective applications to be submitted and for better challenges to adverse decisions.

In this webinar, we will cover the following:

• The test of insurmountable obstacles under EX.1(b) and EX.2
• A detailed look at UKVI Policy Guidance and how this can best be used to assist applications under EX.1(b)
• The current authorities, how these have explained this test further, with examples of the circumstances the courts and Tribunals have found unconvincing
• A discussion on useful evidence and arguments to advance in applications and appeals
• Challenges to clearly unfounded certificates, under s.94 of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, in EX1(b) decisions by way of judicial review proceedings
• Case Activity / Group Discussions

Audience:

This webinar is suitable for practitioners working in immigration law. It is suitable for individuals who are seeking more knowledge and experience and it will be a useful refresher and update course for those who are experienced in this field.

Tutor: Priya Solanki, One Pump Court Chambers

Priya is a busy specialist in immigration, asylum, human rights and nationality law. She appears regularly before the First-Tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chambers and the Administrative Court.

She is very experienced in challenging family applications under the rules by way of appeal and judicial review. She regularly provides in-house training, seminars and webinars.

She is cited as a leading junior in Immigration (including business immigration) in Legal 500 with the Directories stating, “she has a sharp mind and demonstrates excellent client care”, “she is tactically astute, good under pressure and very persuasive in court” and “she is very knowledgeable in presenting appeals”.