Frances is a specialist immigration law practitioner who appears in all levels of court and tribunal, undertaking privately and publicly funded work in all areas of immigration, international human rights, asylum, nationality and administrative law.
Frances’ practice encompasses asylum, business immigration including Turkish business persons, deportation, unlawful detention, EEA, entry clearance, fresh claims, the points based system, family reunion, long residence, domestic violence, unaccompanied children and victims of trafficking.
Frances is also experienced in Judicial Review challenges in all her specialist areas, as well as challenges to age-assessments of unaccompanied asylum seeking children.
In addition to her court work, Frances drafts pleadings, Grounds of Appeal and Judicial Review challenges including Letters before Claim, often on an urgent basis.
Frances is also regularly instructed to provide expert oral and/or written immigration advice to family law solicitors, local authorities, courts and the judiciary for use in family court proceedings. As Frances previously practised in family law, this work particularly encompasses her cross-discipline expertise.
Frances is public access qualified and accepts instructions on a direct access basis in all her specialist areas.
Frances acts as a Litigation Friend on behalf of adults who lack capacity in the immigration system.
SSHD v Barry  EWCA Civ 790
indemnity costs awarded against the Home Secretary after she failed to ‘make good’ her allegation of ‘systemic failure’ by the IAC Tribunals to properly apply IR’s 398 and 399 in foreign criminal deportation cases.
MA (Pakistan) and Ors v SSHD  EWCA Civ 705
linked appeals in which the COA considered when it’s reasonable to remove a non-British child with seven continuous years residence within Paragraphs 276ADE(1)(iv) and EX.1 of the Immigration Rules and s.117B(6) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
Rodriguez, Mandalia and Patel v SSHD  EWCA Civ 2
linked appeals in which the COA determined the ambit of the SSHD’s Evidential Flexibility Policy
Barry (conduct of hearing)  UKUT 00541 (IAC
the President concluded that appeals may be determined without hearing from the Respondent’s representative where the grounds and arguments involve an unmeritorious challenge.
R (on the application of Singh and another) v SSHD  UKUT 134 (IAC)
challenge against certification of a long-residence application
Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association
Bar Pro Bono Unit