A JUDGE has upheld Home Secretary Amber Rudd’s decision to send an American couple who run a bed and breakfast in the Highlands back home.
Russell and Ellen Felber claim to pumped £300,000 into the economy after buying and renovating the Torridon guest house in Inverness, and transforming it into an award-winning accommodation.
The case went to the Court of Session in Edinburgh after the Felbers appealed Ms Rudd’s decision not to grant them leave to remain in the UK.
Lady Carmichael, in a written judgement at the court, yesterday ruled that the minister had not acted unlawfully when she decided the couple did not meet legal requirements to stay.
Advocate Alan Caskie had told the judge during a hearing in May that Ms Rudd should have allowed the New Yorkers to stay in the UK after they arrived on a so-called ‘entrepreneur’ visa in 2011.
The Felbers had fallen in love with the area and spent hundreds of thousands of pounds renovating the property which, in addition to the award, attracted rave reviews online.
However, the court heard yesterday the Home Secretary decided not to grant them indefinite leave to remain in the UK last year.
Ms Rudd made the decision after applying rules which were made in 2014 regarding the numbers of employees that people on entrepreneur visas had to employ.
The Government argued the Felbers were required to have employed more people at the B&B to be eligible to remain.
The court had heard Ms Rudd believed that Mr Felber had not created enough jobs during their time in Scotland.
His lawyer argued that the Home Secretary should have applied her discretion and allowed the Felbers to remain in Inverness.
Dismissing their lawyer’s petition, Lady Carmichael wrote that the court’s had discretion in cases where a body acted unlawfully. But she added: “It is normally outwith the proper scoop of judicial review for the court to tell a public authority how it should exercise its discretion.
“This is not such a case.”
A campaign was launched to stop their deportation and local politicians have been involved in the case.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here