@scftieuwu_60: yuemes🙌 #mahasiswaums #capcut #mastaums2025

Adyro‼️
Adyro‼️
Open In TikTok:
Region: ID
Tuesday 19 August 2025 15:29:07 GMT
926
50
0
2

Music

Download

Comments

There are no more comments for this video.
To see more videos from user @scftieuwu_60, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Procedural Fairness in UK Visit Visa Applications, Lessons from Kaya v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2025) The recent decision of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in Kaya v SSHD [2025] UKSIAC SV/01/2024 provides valuable insight into how procedural fairness is applied in UK visit visa refusals. In this case, the Home Office refused a Turkish national’s visit visa, relying on undisclosed information and concluding that his presence in the UK was not conducive to the public good. Notably, the applicant was not given advance notice of the refusal reasons nor an opportunity to respond. SIAC upheld this approach, stating that the existing application process and refusal notice were sufficient to meet fairness obligations. How This Applies to Visit Visa Applications This decision underlines a crucial reality: visit visa applications are decided solely on the evidence provided at the outset. The Home Office is not obliged to warn applicants about potential concerns or request further documents before refusing. For most applicants, this means that if an application is incomplete or unclear, refusal is highly likely. However, previous cases such as GK (India) [2020] and Wahid [2021] suggest that where dishonesty or deception is alleged, fairness may require giving the applicant an opportunity to respond before refusal. The Kaya decision did not engage with this exception, despite the Home Office implicitly questioning the applicant’s intentions. For applicants and advisers, the practical lesson is clear: Ensure the application addresses potential concerns proactively. Provide clear, consistent evidence to avoid any suspicion of dishonesty. Recognise that there is usually no second chance to explain before a refusal. Where dishonesty is implied, there may still be an arguable case that fairness requires the applicant to be heard, a point practitioners can continue to raise in challenges. As immigration lawyers, we must prepare visit visa applications with this case law in mind, anticipating Home Office concerns and ensuring applications are watertight from the start. Contact: Hassan Chishty Immigration Lawyer Chishty UK Immigration Law & Visa Advisor Email: contact@chishtyukimmigrationlaw.info Address: 1 Turner Road, Atif Centre, High Court, Lahore WhatsApp: +92 320 6258495 #UKImmigration #VisitVisa #VisaRefusal #ImmigrationLaw #ProceduralFairness
Procedural Fairness in UK Visit Visa Applications, Lessons from Kaya v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2025) The recent decision of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in Kaya v SSHD [2025] UKSIAC SV/01/2024 provides valuable insight into how procedural fairness is applied in UK visit visa refusals. In this case, the Home Office refused a Turkish national’s visit visa, relying on undisclosed information and concluding that his presence in the UK was not conducive to the public good. Notably, the applicant was not given advance notice of the refusal reasons nor an opportunity to respond. SIAC upheld this approach, stating that the existing application process and refusal notice were sufficient to meet fairness obligations. How This Applies to Visit Visa Applications This decision underlines a crucial reality: visit visa applications are decided solely on the evidence provided at the outset. The Home Office is not obliged to warn applicants about potential concerns or request further documents before refusing. For most applicants, this means that if an application is incomplete or unclear, refusal is highly likely. However, previous cases such as GK (India) [2020] and Wahid [2021] suggest that where dishonesty or deception is alleged, fairness may require giving the applicant an opportunity to respond before refusal. The Kaya decision did not engage with this exception, despite the Home Office implicitly questioning the applicant’s intentions. For applicants and advisers, the practical lesson is clear: Ensure the application addresses potential concerns proactively. Provide clear, consistent evidence to avoid any suspicion of dishonesty. Recognise that there is usually no second chance to explain before a refusal. Where dishonesty is implied, there may still be an arguable case that fairness requires the applicant to be heard, a point practitioners can continue to raise in challenges. As immigration lawyers, we must prepare visit visa applications with this case law in mind, anticipating Home Office concerns and ensuring applications are watertight from the start. Contact: Hassan Chishty Immigration Lawyer Chishty UK Immigration Law & Visa Advisor Email: [email protected] Address: 1 Turner Road, Atif Centre, High Court, Lahore WhatsApp: +92 320 6258495 #UKImmigration #VisitVisa #VisaRefusal #ImmigrationLaw #ProceduralFairness

About