paully

We have spent the last 18 months dealing with residency orders, prohibited steps orders etc for my niece

They are quite a process - I once represented a Chilean lady who wanted to take her child out of the UK (we were eventually successful but it took the best part of a year).

Hope it worked out well for you, bob.

your best chance to fight this is while still in the UK.

Absolutely right.

If this is breached then it is a criminal offence carrying a possible prison sentence.

Not a criminal offence in point of fact, bob - but contempt of court (ie breach of an order) which enables a judge to imprison the contemnor for up to 2 years. Judges do take these things very seriously though.

The court can seize and hold her passport if there is real evidence that she will do a runner with the child.

Farside,

It depends how far you wish to take this. Do you want the child to live with you in the UK or do you just want regular contact?

It is possible to apply to the (normally High in cases like these) court (as an emergency, if appropriate) for a Prohibited Steps Order under section 8 of the Children Act 1989. The Prohibited Step is to take the child out of the jurisdiction of the UK without your permission or the court's permission. The application would normally be accompanied by one for a Residence Order (for the child to live with you) of a Contact Order (for the child to have regular contact with you) under the same section. You would need to have a lawyer, these are not straightforward applications, and be prepared for it to be a lengthy and acrimonious battle.

^^ Does she need to have a PEO appointment? Yes, it can be quicker, but quite frankly the postal route does not take that long and is cheaper.

So far as I can tell, only one ethnic Anglo-Saxon has been stripped of British citizenship, namely Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks. The courts ordered the government to allow his registration as British, the government acquiesced and then immediately stripped him of his British citizenship.

Hicks was Australian, wasn't he, born in Adelaide?

The chances of the UK government stripping a British-born national of their UK citizenship are remarkably small. If you're not a dual national, I don't believe it would be possible as you would then be technically stateless. That would certainly be against your human rights.

The refusal is garbage. Badly worded, almost incomprehensibly so and ill founded.

The refusal was clearly drafted by someone whose first language is not English.

Remember seeking, as 7by7 has pointed out, that the OP has not given us the full refusal notice. He appears to have typed out part of it in his own style - without capitals and including spelling and grammatical errors, which would explain the 'almost incomprehensively so' part of your reply.

Joking aside, I actually think this plan will be a (commercial) success, and could well represent a new trend.

Agreed. I think it's a clever move by the university. Of course it's mainly about the money, why wouldn't it be?

I think there must be loads of people who choose to visit one or the other but find visas for 2 places to be too time consuming and too much screwing about.

Sure, there'll be some of those - but there are other reasons why non-EU visitors don't come to Britain as well as other European countries. Time, expense (value for money), even the awful weather! That's why it was rather wishful thinking by Visit Britain to highlight only the visa issue.

Someone should have done a bit more research.

I very much doubt that the UK not being in the Schengen area makes much difference to the number of non EEA tourists who visit the UK.

I agree. Wishful thinking by Visit Britain I feel.

In short, Insight, get a job in the UK, get some payslips together and then allow your wife to submit her application! Not ideal for you, but it would appear now to be the safest way. Good luck.

^^^ It's not just Mrs May - they're all at it now:

"Miliband shifts immigration policy, saying Labour 'got it wrong' "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18539472

as already seen in this and his past topics, he will come up with links and quotes to prove that he is right and everyone else wrong.

There is that, 7by7.

If the OP is serious, and given the result of KA and others (reference to the minimum the Govt considers acceptable for a British family to live on) then a judicial review targeting the discriminatory element of having a higher requirement for a foreign spouse relationship could be the way to go.

But really OP needs legal advice and doing it alone I think is foolish. Simply, the OP doesn't have access to a small army of clerks and does not know due process.

He's already been told that a judicial review is the way to go and that he needs lawyers, bangkockney, but he thinks it's too expensive and doesn't want to spend any money on a case. It's up to him.

^ Not the ECJ, 7by7, as this wouldn't be a matter of EU law. I was using that as an analogy.

But he would usually have to exhaust legal avenues in the UK first. It would be extremely unlikely that the ECHR would take up the case otherwise, and his case is hardly 'urgent' in a life-threatening sense.

I don't think this is the legal option that is in my mind and that I am trying to do - JRs are complex and costly. The human rights option has a built in system for those who are poor, cannot have lawyers etc and would fit my position i.e. it is more common man friendly, from my understanding over the last many years

Yes, but judicial reviews can be very effective, and relatively quick - that's the point.

There isn't an option that fits exactly what you are 'trying to do'. Bobrussell is right, even under the HRA you need to be a victim, ie to have actually suffered because of the new rule. It isn't even in effect yet!

Once it is in effect and you have been affected by it, you could contact the European Court of Human Rights by post (contact details are below) and ask it if it will take up the matter and rule against the UK government.

An analogy would be the Portsmouth landlady who successfully wrote a letter to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to complain about the exorbitant Sky TV charges for live football being against EU competition law - however the ECJ is very different to the ECHR. But there are absolutely no guarantees whatsoever that the ECHR will take up the matter, normally you should use the UK court route first, and it will not be a rapid action.

http://www.echr.coe..../bottom/contact

I knew my assumption was right!!!

A victim, under the Act, can be defined in the following ways:

• An individual who has been affected or is at risk of being directly affected by something done by a public authority;

http://hmctsformfind...s/ex503-eng.pdf

The above means I do not have to have applied for a spouse visa.

Well, yes, it is very well-established law (considerably pre-dating the Human Rights Act) that an individual affected by the decision of a public authority can challenge it in the High Court by way of what is called a judicial review (JR) procedure. The court has the power to declare the rule (law) void because of unreasonableness or that the minister went beyond his/her powers (ultra vires) in making it, or because it was in conflict with the HRA.

But - a JR is a very technical and complex procedure for which preparation lawyers are very much recommended. Also, there is no legal funding for a JR hearing (except for asylum) and in your case your spouse would have had to have been refused by the relevant government department/ agency - so she would need to have applied for a spouse visa and have been refused one. Not a straightforward matter then.

^ You mean 'only applicants may enter', don't you?

If there wasn't actually any real domestic violence either then it's pretty irresponsible of her solicitor to recommend this, because such a claim could constitute fraud.

But remember that the definition of 'domestic violence' for this purpose is quite wide, it covers abuse as well as violence, as bobrussell pointed out.

Wonder how many "International School" teachers could handle the pressures of having to publish every year. Wait, it's irrelevant, because it's never going to happen.

And I wonder how many university lecturers could handle the pressures of far longer teaching hours plus marking/paperwork of an international school or US/UK school teacher. You know little of pressure until you have experienced that.

Nothing wrong with TEFLing, it's an honourable enough job. But you can't compare it in terms of workload to international school or US/UK/Aus etc school teaching.

When a TEFL teacher sends their CV into a real international school it gets filed straight in the bin without even being looked at. They won't even get their foot into the door so your point about it being a shock to them is totally irrelevent.

Doesn't stop some of the TEFL fraternity from wanting to get a nice int. school salary, though, does it..

BTW, lucifer, unless you're a moderator, kindly refrain from lecturing others as to what is, or isn't, relevant in their posts.

It seems that International school Teachers do many of the same things as they do in the UK.

Which is another good reason for those intending to teach at the better int. schools to get home country teaching experience as well as a PGCE or its equivalent. If you can hack teaching in a UK school for 2-3 years, you should be fine in an int.school. It would be a huge shock to the system for TEFL teachers though.

However, the UK Govt is currently working on some extensive changes to pensions. Exactly what the details are is still unclear, but we are led to believe that these changes are imminent, I.e. next year or so.

I advise anyone in Alan 's position to arrange for their spouse to start making voluntary NI contributions ASAP,

Yes - the proposal was specifically set out in the Queen's Speech to Parliament earlier this month, so likely to become law as long as the UK coalition government survives and there is any way out of the double-dip recession we are currently in.

But, as you say, best to start making voluntary NI contributions now so that she can qualify for the £140 per week (uplifted) flat rate pension.

http://www.theactuar...n-reform-plans/

The BBC has made this point about the proposals:

"The self-employed, and some women, are also likely to benefit, as National Insurance rules have meant they have tended to get a lower state pension."

But we'll have to see what pans out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18005946

I want to work in an International school in Bangkok. I want to know if they require a Thai police clearance if I was living in Thailand prior to starting work with them.

I think it depends what sort of 'International School' it is you are trying to get work at. If it's a top-notch one, I would assume so in addition to home-country police clearance. If it's a 'lower-end' int school, I wouldn't think they'd be bothered about this.

I send from Nationwide to SCB.

Arrives next day but the fee is £25

Yes, we do too. Agree with sending the money in sterling and asking receiving bank to pay additional charges, keeps fees to a minimum.