T: +44 (0)20 7583 1315 E: clerks@tgchambers.com W: tgchambers.com/ https://tgchambers.com/member-profile/julia-smyth/ Julia Smyth Year of Call: 1996 Practice Areas Civil Fraud EU Law Public Law Attorney General Panel Appointed to B panel Email: jsmyth@tgchambers.com Awards Experience Julia returned to self-employed practice at TGC in July 2012 following a successful and diverse career as a government lawyer. Since returning to chambers, Julia has developed a strong public and EU law practice, particularly in the fields of social security, EU free movement and immigration. Julia also specialises in insurance fraud. Julia was a pupil and then a tenant in chambers between 1996 and 2000. EU Law and Free Movement Described by Legal 500 as a genuine and outstanding free movement specialist who handles cases beyond her call and an effective advocate with an encyclopeadic knowledge of free movement issues, Julia is experienced in all aspects of EU law. She has been instructed in many recent test cases, often as sole counsel. As a senior government lawyer, Julia was closely involved in many ground-breaking social security and EU free movement cases in the domestic courts and CJEU and established and chaired a cross-government group on EU free movement issues. She also spent several years as a lawyer advising the government on the regulation of medicines and medical devices. Social Security Since returning to chambers, Julia has been instructed in some of the leading right to reside and EU social security co- page 1 of 8
ordination cases, as well as ECHR and domestic law challenges. Julia is experienced in all aspects of social security law. Before returning to chambers, Julia was a senior lawyer at DWP leading a team of lawyers which advised Ministers on means-tested benefit entitlement of foreign nationals. Immigration Julia regularly appears in the High Court and Upper Tribunal. She has experience in many areas of immigration law, including Tier 2 cases (sponsorship), Article 8 ECHR claims, fresh claims, unlawful detention and appeal rights cases. Other Public Law As a government lawyer, Julia advised the government on NHS secondary care, as well as prison health and prison judicial reviews. Insurance Fraud Julia specialises in acting for insurers in cases in which fraud is alleged or suspected, including staged and contrived road traffic accidents, induced accidents, bogus passenger cases, low velocity impacts and exaggerated claims. Health and Safety / Regulatory Since returning to chambers, Julia has acted in a criminal prosecution in a regulatory context, led by Keith Morton QC. Previously, Julia worked for several years for the Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. Her work included advising on enforcement action in relation to both medicines and medical devices, together with broader regulatory issues. Julia was also legal adviser to the Committee on Safety of Medicines. Directories An outstanding barrister with an encyclopaedic knowledge of EU law. She is a phenomenally hard worker and has outstanding judgement. Legal 500 2018 A genuine and outstanding free-movement specialist, who handles cases beyond her call. (EU Law) Legal 500 2017 An effective advocate with an encyclopaedic knowledge of free movement issues. (EU Law) Legal 500 2016 Memberships ALBA page 2 of 8
Languages French and German (working knowledge) Cases SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT V SHAH & BOUROUISA [2017] EWCA CIV 2028 12/04/2017 Sole counsel for SSHD in two test cases in the Court of Appeal, concerning the Zambrano principle and the implications of Case C-133/15 Chavez Vilchez and others in family unit cases. David Blundell of Landmark Chambers represented SSHD in a linked appeal concerning adult carers of British citizens. ARTHUR V HER MAJESTY S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS [2017] EWCA CIV 1756 09/04/2017 Instructed as sole counsel for HMRC. The Court of Appeal upheld HMRC s decision that Mrs Arthur s husband was ordinarily resident in the UK and thus that she ought to have made a joint claim for tax credits. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK & PENSIONS v GUBELADZE [2017] EWCA CIV 1751 08/04/2017 Case concerning: (i) the quality of residence necessary to establish permanent residence under Article 17 of Directive 2004/38; and (ii) the proportionality of the extension of the Worker Registration Scheme between 2009 and 2011. Instructed for SSWP, led by David Blundell at Landmark Chambers. R (SINGH) V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT [2017] EWHC 1138 (Admin) 07/04/2017 Instructed for SSHD. Administrative Court rejected Claimant s argument that s.120 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 required SSHD to consider an application based on EU law rights. Claimant s reliance on EU law principle of equivalence also rejected. R (CONNELL) V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT [2017] EWHC 100 (Admin) 06/04/2017 Instructed for SSHD. Administrative Court rejected Claimant s argument that SSHD was required to deport him to Ireland. Now on appeal to the Court of Appeal (led by David Blundell at Landmark Chambers in Court of Appeal). page 3 of 8
LO V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK & PENSIONS [2017] UKUT 440 (AAC) 05/04/2017 Instructed for SSWP. Upper Tribunal accepted SSWP s argument that LO could not rely on EU law proportionality principle to establish entitlement to Income Support. FM V SSWP (DLA) [2017] UKUT 380 (AAC) 04/04/2017 Instructed for SSWP. Upper Tribunal rejected FM s ECHR and Equality Act 2010 challenge to the past presence test applicable to Disability Living Allowance. ALHASHEM V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK & PENSIONS, COURT OF APPEAL [2016] EWCA Civ 395 15 March 2016 Instructed as sole counsel for SSWP. The Court of Appeal held that Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) was not a labour market benefit payable to jobseekers from other Member States. R (BILAL AHMED) V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT, COURT OF APPEAL [2016] EWCA Civ 603 8/03/2016 The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Ahmed s appeal against the decision of the Upper Tribunal in R (Bilal Ahmed) v SSHD [2015] UKUT 00436 (IAC), in which the UT held that Mr Ahmed did not have a right of appeal which was suspensive of his removal. Instructed for SSHD, led by Colin Thomann at 39 Essex Chambers in Court of Appeal. R (Manzay Ltd) (T/A Mirch Masala Restaurant) V Secretary Of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 2582 (Admin) 17.10.16 Challenge to SSHD s revocation of Tier 2 sponsor licence. R (X) V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT [2016] EWHC 1997 (Admin) 29.7.16 Test case on reg. 24AA of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 ( deport now, appeal later ). Led by David Blundell at Landmark Chambers page 4 of 8
R (Lounes) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 436 (Admin) 07/03/16 Test case concerning the application of Directive 2004/38 to dual nationals and their family members. Referred to the CJEU: see now Case C165/16, judgment 14 November 2017. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK & PENSIONS V MM; BK V SSWP [2016] UKUT 547 (AAC) 08/04/2016 Instructed for SSWP. Case concerning EU social security co-ordination legislation and the domestic law genuine and sufficient link test. Now on appeal to Court of Appeal. SSWP v MB (JSA) (and linked cases) [2016] UKUT 372 (AAC) 19.8.16 Test cases on new genuine prospects of work test applicable to EU jobseekers. Garland v HMRC [2016] UKUT 0431 (TCC) 17 Oct 2016 EU social security co-ordination legislation and retrospective payment of voluntary national insurance contributions. Sala (EFMS: Right Of Appeal) [2016] UKUT 00411 (IAC) 19.8.16 Instructed for SSHD. Test case on appeal rights of those claiming to have a right to reside as an extended family member under EU law. Hainsworth v Ministry of Defence, Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening, Supreme Court July 2015 Barristers involved: David Barr QC Julia Smyth Directive 2000/78/EC and reasonable adjustments; application for permission to appeal. David Barr QC and Julia Smyth acted for the Ministry of Defence. page 5 of 8
GS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKUT 0687 (AAC) 15/12/2015 Whether the age 65 cut-off provisions applicable to Disability Living Allowance were contrary to EU law. R (Masalskas) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Regulations 24AA and 29AA EEA Regs) (IJR) [2015] UKUT 677 26/11/2015 First case before the Upper Tribunal on reg. 24AA of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006. Weldemichael and another (St Prix [2014] EUECJ C-507/12; effect) [2015] UKUT 540 (IAC) 23/09/2015 Three Judge Panel test case on domestic implementation of CJEU Case C-507/12 Saint-Prix pregnant workers and worker status. Ayinde and Thinjom (Carers Reg.15A Zambrano) [2015] UKUT 560 (IAC) 13/8/2015 Test case on the applicability of the Zambrano principle to carers of adult Union citizens. The Upper Tribunal accepted that the Appellants did not benefit from Zambrano. News Three members of TGC elevated to B panel 12/07/2018 Emma Price Sian Reeves Their appointments are from 1 September 2018 for a period of 5 years. Court of Appeal hands down important judgment on Zambrano principle 13/12/2017 The Court of Appeal accepted SSHD s argument that the CJEU s recent judgment in Case C-133/15 Chavez-Vilchez & ors [2017] 3 WLR 1326 did not represent any kind of sea-change to the fundamental approach to be taken (para 74, per Irwin LJ) and that the test remained one of compulsion. Thus the correct approach, in a case involving a British citizen child, was to ask whether the situation of the child was such that, if the non-eu citizen parent left the EU, the British citizen would be unable to care for the child, so that the child would be compelled to leave (para 77). While consideration of respect for family life was a relevant factor, it could not be a trump card enabling a court or tribunal to conclude that a child would be compelled to leave because family life would be diminished by the departure of one parent (para 78); where the British parent was capable of looking after the child, there was no proper basis for a finding of compulsion (para 79). Similarly, in an adult case, the test remained one of compulsion (para 81). page 6 of 8
Court of Appeal hears tax credits appeal 24/10/2017 The appellant argues that the First-tier and Upper Tribunal erred when determining that her husband, a national of Ghana, was ordinarily resident in the UK such that she should have made a joint claim. Judgment has been reserved. Court of Appeal hears significant EU law proportionality and free movement appeal 20/10/2017 SSWP appeals against the decision of the Upper Tribunal in TG v SSWP [2015] UKUT (AAC), in which Julia Smyth represented SSWP. The appeal concerns two discrete issues. The first relates to the decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to continue the Worker Registration Scheme between 2009 and 2011. That scheme applied to nationals of eight of the ten Member States which acceded to the EU in 2004. One of the questions for the court, following the decision of the Supreme Court in R (Lumsdon and others) v Legal Services Board [2015] UKSC 41, is the appropriate level of scrutiny of such a decision. SSWP s case is that a proportionality review must be conducted by reference to the manifestly inappropriate test. The second issue is the quality of residence needed to acquire a right of permanent residence pursuant to Article 17(1)(a) of Directive 2004/38. Court of Appeals hears Zambrano appeals 14/07/2017 The appeals concern the application, in different scenarios, of the principle set out by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the case of Zambrano v Office national de l emploi [2012] QB 265, recently considered by the CJEU in Case C-133/15 Chavez Vilchez and others (judgment on 10 May 2017). Judgment has been reserved. Challenge to Irish deportation policy dismissed by Administrative Court 03/02/2017 The Claimant argued that the policy on the deportation of Irish nationals was ultra vires the legislative provisions of the UK Borders Act 2007, but the Court rejected that challenge, accepting the Secretary of State s submission that s.32 of the Act did not require a deportation order to be made in the Claimant s case. The Court also rejected a reasons challenge advanced by the Claimant. The judgment is reported as: R (Connell) v SSHD [2017] EWHC 100 (Admin). Court of Appeal dismisses ESA / EU jobseeker appeal 21/04/2016 The Appellant, represented by Helen Mountfield QC and Tom Royston, had argued that ESA was a labour market benefit, such that jobseekers from other Member States ought to be able to claim it. Domestic regulations prevent them from doing so. The Court of Appeal accepted the Secretary of State s submissions that the Court of Justice of the European Union had taken a narrow approach to what was a labour market benefit, and that ESA s predominant function was to provide a subsistence income for those with limited capability to work, rather than to facilitate access to the labour market in the EU law sense. You can view the publication at http://tgchambers.com/news-and-resources/news/court-appeal-hears-esa-eu-jobseeker-appeal/ Court of Appeal hears ESA / EU jobseeker appeal 16/03/2016 page 7 of 8
Judgment has been reserved. The Appellant, represented by Helen Mountfield QC and Tom Royston, seeks to establish that Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) is a labour market benefit payable to jobseekers from other Member States. Administrative Ct refers question to CJEU on rights of dual nationals 08/03/2016 The case concerns a Spanish national who worked in the UK, subsequently acquired British nationality and several years later sought to claim a residence right under Directive 2004/38 for her third country national spouse. The question referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union asks whether a dual national continues to benefit from the Directive in such circumstances. Court of Appeal confirms Upper Tribunal s decision in Bilal Ahmed 08/03/2016 In an extempore judgment, the CA dismissed Mr Ahmed s appeal against the decision of the Upper Tribunal (R (Bilal Ahmed) v SSHD (EEA/s10 appeal rights: effect) [2015] UKUT 00436 (IAC)). The CA accepted that Mr Ahmed, a non EEA national considered by SSHD to have entered a sham marriage with an EEA national, did not have an appeal right which was suspensive of his removal. page 8 of 8