Press Release by Ramzan Sharif, Solicitor at Fountain Solicitors, Walsall
The Supreme Court rejects the Government’s arguments on immigration in student’s appeal.
In an unprecedented decision this morning, the Supreme Court has rejected the Government’s attempt at thwarting Indian student Mr Manish Mandalia from remaining in the United Kingdom.
The Government had spared no expense in using their top barristers including First Treasury Counsel Mr James Eadie QC to resist the appeal but the Supreme Court held that the Government’s argument was misplaced and pedantic.
Mr Mandalia is an Indian national who had come to the United Kingdom in 2008. He had applied to extend his visa in 2009 after successfully passing his first set of exams. He had to fill out a 43 page document to extend his leave but he missed the smallest of small print which said that he had to provide bank statements showing 28 days. Instead he provided a bank statement showing just 22 days. Instead of contacting him to correct that very minor mistake, the Home Office told him to leave the United Kingdom. Mr Mandalia then battled through the Tribunal and Courts until his appeal was heard at the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court had no hesitation in concluding that the decision of the Home Office was both controversial and wrong.
The case is likely to lead to many other cases being reviewed and many other cases being allowed.
The Supreme Court also criticised the Home Office lawyer at the Tribunal for failing to bring to the Judge’s attention the “evidential flexibility policy”. Mr Mandalia was not legally represented at that time. Had the Home Office lawyer done so then not only would there have been a massive saving time, but also a massive saving in cost.
The Supreme Court said it considered,
“…the Secretary of State’s submission to be misplaced even at the high level of pedantry on which it has been set. Mr Mandalia’s bank statements numbered 62, 63 and 64 formed a series. It must have been obvious to the caseworker, as he studied statement numbered 64, that it formed the last in a series and that the statement or statements which covered the preceding six days, and which turned out to be the statements numbered 62 and 63, were missing from the series.”
Mr Mandalia lives in Leicester with his British mother. He is relieved that he can now finally get on with his studies and move forward with his life.
Mr Mandalia was represented by Mr Ramzan Sharif and Ms Keerum Akhtar of Fountain Solicitors, Mander House, 36 Bradford Street, Walsall, WS1 3QA. Counsel were Mr Abid Mahmood of No5 Chambers, Birmingham and Ms Nazmun Ismail of Central Chambers, Manchester.
A copy of the Judgement is available from the Supreme Court website Mandalia v SSHD [2015] UKSC 59 using the following link: https://www.supremecourt.uk/…/d…/uksc-2014-0059-judgment.pdf
If you require advice or assistance in Immigration and Asylum Law, Family Law, Personal Injury, Employment Law, National Security, Wills, Landlord and Tenant, Welfare Benefits, Debt, please do not hesitate to contact ourselves on 01922 645 429 or by email info@fountainsolicitors.com
