In the long residence issue most of the judges are not fair enough because they do not want to follow the long residence policy properly. They just try to overlook the long residence policy. In terms of the home office published long residence policy, disregarded period must be count as lawful because there was declared discretion within the policy, please see page number 28 of the long residence policy version 13.0 There is blank and white declaration that lawful residence is continuing under home office discretion. In this judgment has no answer why people would not get home office declared discretion and can not rely on the published policy. Judicial decision should be more clear and appropriate. Thanks
So in simple words if Afzal makeup the time when he was without leave and again apply for ILR should he be granted?
In the long residence issue most of the judges are not fair enough because they do not want to follow the long residence policy properly. They just try to overlook the long residence policy.
In terms of the home office published long residence policy, disregarded period must be count as lawful because there was declared discretion within the policy, please see page number 28 of the long residence policy version 13.0
There is blank and white declaration that lawful residence is continuing under home office discretion.
In this judgment has no answer why people would not get home office declared discretion and can not rely on the published policy.
Judicial decision should be more clear and appropriate. Thanks