Julian Norman

About Julian:

Julian Norman is currently joint Head of the Immigration Team at Goldsmith Chambers and works closely with Sterling Law.

Julian has specialised in immigration law since 2002. After ten years working in private practice, initially as a paralegal and then qualifying as a solicitor in 2007, she was called to the Bar in 2012.

After being called to the Bar she has continued to build a practice in immigration and professional discipline. She is registered to undertake Direct Access work and she is also a qualified mediator.

Julian is recommended in the Legal 500 2025 edition as a Leading Junior (Tier 4) ‘Julian is a fantastic advocate; she is calm, collected, concise, and always well-prepared. She makes clients feel comfortable and well-represented’.

Julian has worked in immigration law since 2002 and is familiar with all aspects of immigration, including applications and appeals from the First Tier Tribunal to the Court of Appeal. She is experienced in entry clearance, immigration, asylum, deportation and EEA work. She specialises in particular in family immigration appeals which have an Article 8 element, and in claims based on sex, sexual orientation and / or gender.

With respect to asylum claims, Julian has been involved in the leading Ukrainian cases of  PK (Ukraine) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1756 and PK and OS (basic rules of human conduct) Ukraine CG [2020] UKUT 314 (IAC) , and has a particular interest in claims from Ukraine and the former Soviet states.

Notable cases Julian worked on:

PK and OS (basic rules of human conduct) Ukraine CG [2020] UKUT 314 (IAC) https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/314.html The Upper Tribunal case changed the definition as to when a draft evader will be a refugee. The Tribunal agreed that if the background evidence shows a real risk that the asylum seeker would provide “indispensable support” to a military committing acts contrary to international humanitarian law, then any criminal penalty for refusal, including a fine, would amount to persecution. OS appealed to the Court of Appeal and was granted permission to appeal. The full hearing was listed for 30 March 2022. However, after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia on 24 February 2022, the SSHD agreed to withdraw the underlying decision and reconsider the application in light of ongoing events. Julian was led by Anthony Metzer QC.

PK (Ukraine) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1756 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1756.html This overturned the Upper Tribunal decision in PK (draft evader; punishment; minimum severity) [2018] UKUT 241 (IAC) and looked at military service in Ukraine. Sir Rupert Jackson, with whom Patten J and Asplin J agreed, said that “the question whether a draft evader facing a non-custodial punishment for failing to serve in an army which regularly commits acts contrary to IHL is entitled to refugee status, is one of overarching importance” and allowed the appeal, remitting it to the Upper Tribunal. Julian was led by Anthony Metzer QC.

TS (Ukraine) v SSHD – a claim relating to military service in Ukraine. The Appellant was successful on the basis that he faced detention in conditions which would contravene Article 3 ECHR.

NK (Ukraine) v SSHD – this appeal related to Article 8 family life of a mother with two children born in the UK, and whether it would be reasonable for the children to leave the UK with their mother. The appeal was allowed.

Onyschuk v SSHD- successfully argued that a British spouse would face ‘insurmountable obstacles’ to moving to his wife’s country of origin, and that his wife should therefore be entitled to remain in the UK under Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules.

Areas of Expertise:

• Immigration
• Regulatory and Disciplinary Tribunals
• Public Law