Chicken Nuggets

[Paddy]

What a waste of public money Legal Aid funding

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/forma...s)+AND+(Disha)

[SueEllen]

There are two British children involved so the law needs to be applied properly even though in this case he relied on his partner.

Judges can and do demand British children are returned from living abroad even though they don't have any family members identified as being able to look after them here.

[northernladuk]

I'm confused here. The headings say 'Albanian criminal allowed to stay in Britain due to son's dislike of 'foreign' chicken nuggets'. He won this appeal in 2021/22 or there abouts so he could stay but late last year the Secretary of State appealed that the decision to allow him to stay was incorrect? And that's the latest status? He now has to go through an appeal to stay again?

The headings make out like he's won the right to stay but from what I can see the new's has popped up because the original ruling in 2022 has been set aside?

Very confusing headlines. And what's a waste of money? Challenging it and going through the process again?

[malvolio]

Dasha was an illegal immigrant from Albania, later granted leave to remain (hence his child is British). Dasha was stripped of his British citizenship in 2021 after he was jailed for two years over possessing £250,000 in cash, known to be proceeds of crime.

He appealed against deportation using his son's food sensitivities (of which only the foreign chicken nugget example was described in the court documents) and won. The Home Secretary was granted leave to appeal against this decision and the case is on-going.

I read in one report that he is separated from his family and rarely sees his son. Family life...???

The real problem is not that this is a court case, but that there is any kind of case to answer in the first place. Big ups for Tony and the Yooman Rites industry...

[northernladuk]

4. The appellant's asylum claim was refused on 14 September 2001, the Secretary of State not being satisfied that the appellant had a well-founded fear of persecution. The appellant sought to appeal, though that process was withdrawn on 6 March 2003.
5. The appellant was granted Exceptional Leave to Remain on 8 September 2005 and Indefinite Leave to Remain on 26 September 2005. The appellant was naturalised on 6 December 2007.

Isn't this the root of the problem?

I'm guessing we are going to see more and more colourful excuses to try game the system. There is one ongoing about a lady from Grenada saying her Polish (or that region) husband won't like heat or the cuisine. Problem is here with so much noise the real cases where family life and kids that genuinely need looking at are just gonna get lost in the noise.

[SueEllen]

Isn't this the root of the problem?

I'm guessing we are going to see more and more colourful excuses to try game the system. There is one ongoing about a lady from Grenada saying her Polish (or that region) husband won't like heat or the cuisine. Problem is here with so much noise the real cases where family life and kids that genuinely need looking at are just gonna get lost in the noise.

If he loses then his case will be used as a precedent so it will decrease the number of cases using that excuse or similar colourful excuses.

Anyway I think if you claim asylum and then naturalise you should be made to renounce your other citizenship before you naturalise. As if your original home country is too dangerous for you to ever go back there or dream of ever returning then it's citizenship you don't need. Being caught with that citizenship then should be grounds for deportation.

[SueEllen]

Yep. If you naturalise, you've decided that you want the UK to be your home country, even if your original country becomes safe.

I'd have surrendered my British nationality if I'd have had to, to become Swiss. I'm glad I didn't have to, but I no longer vote in UK elections even though I can. I've no desire to return permanently.

Isn't it safer to travel on a Swiss passport? I mean the Swiss don't go around starting wars.

[sadkingbilly]

Isn't it safer to travel on a Swiss passport? I mean the Swiss don't go around starting wars.

no, they just arm everyone involved.

[Zigenare]

no, they just arm everyone involved.

And supply mercenaries.

[Uncle Albert]

no, they just arm everyone involved.

And supply mercenaries.

I imagine that there are a lot of very well armed people who would not like anything to happen to the gnomes and their discreetly stored deposits.