Natsai is an established barrister with substantial experience in representing both corporate and individual clients in all higher courts, up to and including the United Kingdom Supreme Court. Called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Gray’s Inn, Natsai has a sensitive but authoritative presence, which is coupled with intellectual rigour. She is noted for her meticulous approach to all cases, and her ability to keep track of the real issues in any case.

Natsai was appointed a fee-paid Judge of the First-Tier Tribunal, assigned to the Social Entitlement Chamber (Social Security and Child Support), in April 2013. She was further assigned to the Immigration and Asylum Chamber in October 2014. In February 2016, she was certified as an International Training Judge by the International Committee of the Judicial College and is authorised to undertake overseas training of Judges on behalf of the Judicial College.

Natsai was appointed a Tax Judge in 2018 continuing her progress at the Judiciary.

She appeared before the UK Supreme Court in the landmark constitutional case of R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal [2011] 3 WLR 107; [2011] All ER (D) 149; [2011] UKSC 28, concerning whether the Upper Tribunal, established by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, is amenable to judicial review in cases where no statutory appeal is available. This case displayed her passion for ensuring that access to justice is available for all. The case gave rise to the second-tier appeals criteria for judicial review of the Upper Tribunal’s refusal to give permission to appeal to itself from decisions of the First-tier Tribunal, and successfully established that the Upper Tribunal is amenable to judicial review as a result the constitutional role of the High Court to supervise all inferior courts and tribunals. The Civil Procedure Rules were also amended as a result of the case, giving rise to the new procedure under Part 54.

She was counsel in the case of Syed (curtailment of leave – notice) [2013] UKUT 00144 (IAC) which resulted in the need for the Secretary of State to prove that notice of a decision affecting extant leave was communicated to the person concerned, in order for it to be effective. It was decided that the Secretary of State cannot rely upon deemed postal service. The decision is important for all those affected by decisions to curtail leave.  This case decided the following:

“In the absence of an order made by statutory instrument under section 4(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 dealing with the giving of notice of variation of leave where there is no right of appeal, the Secretary of State has to be able to prove that notice of a decision varying leave to remain under section 3(3)(a) of the Immigration Act 1971 where there is no right of appeal was communicated to the person concerned for it to be effective. Where there is no “immigration decision” the Immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003 do not apply. Communication would be effective if made to a person authorised to receive it on that person’s behalf, see Hosier v Goodall [1962] 1 All E.R. 30, but the Secretary of State cannot rely upon deemed postal service.”

The case subsequently gave rise to an amendment of the Immigration (Leave to Enter and Remain) Order 2000 (SI 2000/1161). The Amendment Order of 2013 (SI 2013/1749) subsequently contained provisions dealing with the giving of notice and presumptions in respect of receipt, including in respect of non-appealable immigration decisions.

Summary of experience:

Her public/administrative law experience includes representation in judicial review proceedings; EU law; appeals under the Geneva Convention; the European Convention on Human Rights; the Ankara Agreement; the Palermo Protocol (trafficking); Operation Nexus.

In civil proceedings her previous experience included contractual disputes (international contracts and conflict of laws); claims concerning regulated agreements involving banks and other large financial institutions; corporate & personal insolvency proceedings (including cross-border insolvency under the UNCITRAL Model law); and opinions on various aspects of civil litigation (liability; quantum, procedure, cost-effectiveness & settlement strategy).

Natsai previously practised criminal law and has been instructed in Crown Court trials including murder, armed robbery and money laundering.