6 February 2015
A solicitor convicted of assisting unlawful immigration into a European Union member state this week lost his appeal against conviction, shortly after being struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
Nazarat Ali, a former sole practitioner and principal of Ali Sinclair Solicitors in East London, helped clients secure immigration status in the UK through sham marriages between Indian or Pakistani men and women, mainly from Eastern Europe.
Mr Ali was sentenced to six years in jail by Inner London Crown Court in April 2014 and his firm was shut down by the SRA in the same month.
Lady Justice Rafferty told the Court of Appeal that the acts relied on by the prosecution were “broadly similar”, in that he provided a bride, who was brought by an associate to his office and taken to meet his client. He then advised the couple to apply for a certificate of approval (COA) from the UK Border Agency.
“These were acts capable of facilitating a breach of immigration law by the clients,” Rafferty LJ said. “A sham bride was essential for a sham marriage and the appellant was instrumental in finding her.
“A condition precedent for a sham marriage was an application for a COA, a document the Crown proved the appellant was instrumental in creating and submitting.”
Delivering judgment in R v Ali [2015] EWCA Crim 43, Rafferty LJ said the right of permanent residence in the UK could only be acquired if the marriage were not a ‘sham’ carried out solely for immigration purposes.
Lady Justice Rafferty said the offence Mr Ali was said to have facilitated was a breach of section 24A of the Immigration Act 1971. There was no need for a sham marriage to have taken place for the offence to be committed, but the Crown still had to prove that Mr Ali’s acts “facilitated” them.
She dismissed Mr Ali’s appeal. Mr Justice Foskett and Judge Carey, sitting as a judge of the Court of Appeal, agreed.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal struck Mr Ali off the roll of solicitors at the end of last month, and ordered him to pay costs of £1,650. The SDT’s ruling is awaiting publication.
Tags: Court of Appeal, immigration, Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal
Leave a comment
* Denotes required fieldLegal Futures Blog
Why your firm should support working mothers to the hilt

If you are going to balance the demands of work and childcare, and stay sane, you need to adapt, and with any luck your firm will adapt with you. In doing so you will both win, and your respective productivity will soar. When I had my son, I realised just how lucky I was. Not only did I have the incredible support of my, and my husband’s, family through this life-changing time, but I had a firm that offered me complete flexibility and control over my return to business life.
Associate News
More firms choose Tikit P4W for practice and case management in what has been a record sales year for Tikit
Eclipse announces new functionality to cater for the Precedent S Electronic Bill of Costs
Legal Eye strengthens team with new appointment
Chair of the Law Society Board to open Teal Compliance Conference
UK law firms expect long-term decline in work in the event of ‘no-deal’ Brexit
3 questions to ask when creating the IT platform for your new software
Livingstons Solicitors, the latest firm to select Linetime’s matter management