The refusal of a loan for a student gets overturned by a court because of his immigration status in the UK

A ban on some immigrants who have been benefiting from loans that were backed by government for higher education has been overturned successfully by a school leaver. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom made a ruling in favour of Beaurish Tigere a 20 year old who was denied a loan for students. This ruling has the potential for making ways for a lot of other youthful persons who reside in Britain to have access to funds for their education in higher institutions. Apart from being refused loans for students, these students equally have to pay tuition rates that are higher for students who are not from the home country.

Tigere who arrived in the United Kingdom from Zambia when he was only six years old, went to primary and high school based in York. During her stay at high school, she was made the senior prefect for girls, obtained three advanced levels and gained admission to study for international business management at Northumbria University.

Temporary long term holders of visa refused loans for students

However, when submitting her application for a loan for students, she was told that the status of her UK immigration for discretionary leave to stay back meant that she was disqualified for pupil funds under the scheme that is backed by the Government. The Supreme Court decided that the ban which prevented any individual who was not a citizen of the United Kingdom and persons who had been granted a leave to indefinitely stay in the United Kingdom from getting a loan for students was not justified and not appropriate.

The decision was delivered on Wednesday, July 29th by the Supreme Court’s deputy president, Lady Hale, who stated that there was no significance in the numbers that were going to be affected, but that only a proportion that was small of the annual applications for student finance.

She also stated that anyone who was refused a loan for students was going to experience some difficulty in understanding why they had the permission to gain access to all of the public services of the United Kingdom like welfare benefits that are cash but were still not able to have access to this particular benefit which turns out to be a loan that is repayable.

Leavers of school do not know of the limitations on entitlement to student loans

An attorney for Public Interest Lawyers Paul Heron stated that leavers of school find out that they are not qualified for an advance when they were in their last year in high school. Tigere was represented by Heron in her care and stated that she was a brave and talented student, which was a real praise for the education system of the United Kingdom.

He stated further that she had arrived where she was now through working hard exceptionally, only to be refused the chance to advance her studies, a case which has continued to go on for 24 months. Still, she had been successful in questioning this blanket restriction allowing her to advance forward.

Tigere as well as several numbers of other students who were unjustifiably prevented from higher education would be permitted by the ruling of the Supreme Court to follow other opportunities and achieve their capabilities and aspirations.

A welcomed decision

A legal charity which took part in the case – Just for Kids Law – welcomed the ruling of the Supreme Court. The director of the charity Shauneen Lambe stated that the ruling was a great outcome for the lots of young academics who were successful and ambitious. Any outcome which had been different from this one would have hindered many of them from going after any professions which needed a degree from the university.

She further stated that the charity was looking forward to partnering with the government to make sure that the ability of students to get loans are started again in anticipation of the publication of the results for the advanced levels for this year, which is expected to happen on the 13th of August. This was going to enable students who obtained the required grades to have the chance to enlist for paces in the university this autumn.

The hearing was attended by a lot of school-leavers in the same situation

Some leavers of school who had been encountering the same situation as Tigere’s were in attendance in Westminster, London during the hearing at the Supreme Court. As a result of the hearing Dami Makinde who is 21 years old stated that the result was the ultimate that they could have desired. She did not know how quickly changes would take place; it was possible it could take some time. However, they could at least attend a university, which was thrilling to her.

Makinde is another pupil in the same situation with a United Kingdom temporary long term visa. She had received an offer of a space in Surrey at the Royal Holloway College. As an overseas student she had been asked to pay every year £13,000 to take care of the tuition expenses of her course in criminology and psychology because her status on immigration did not permit her a qualification for a student loan which was supported by Government.

Emmanuel Opuku who is 20 years of age is equally in the same situation. He has collected a letter of offer from London’s Imperial College for studying chemistry. He was informed that he required £26,000 to have his place secured because he is not qualified for finance for students. He stated that he has had to take a gap of two years, but that through the campaign they have been able to show the impact that they were making.

Alison East an attorney at the Coram Children’s Legal Centre who also gave evidence for the hearing of the Supreme Court stated that these youths have been hard working to pass well at college and high school; their aspirations was to turn out to become the best individuals that they could ever be. Watching while their peers and friends went on to university while they remained in the corners with the knowledge that it could last for as much as 10 years, left them as youthful people with feelings of marginalization.

She stated further that the outcome of this result was a landmark which completely delights the Coram Children’s Legal centre to note that this decision had been taken by the Supreme Court.