Mon-Fri 9am-6pm
    020 7237 3388
    (UK Local Number, 1p per min)
    ICS Legal, Suite 11, City Business Centre,
    Lower Road, London SE16 2XB

In-country Adult Dependant Relative & Human Rights Claim

Card image cap

This appeal relates to an application lodged by ICS Legal on behalf of the appellant under the Adult Dependant Relative & Article 8 ECHR claim.

This matter was never considered in the merits and personal circumstances which led the application being refused by the Home Office. Full facts of the case and what we did is enclosed. Please note due to data protection, the appellant's name or any relevant details are not enclosed. 

Summary case facts

The appellant who was married to her British partner, entered the UK on a visit visa and he had passed away whilst she was in the UK. 

Both she and her husband resided outside of the UK prior to her entry as a visitor. Her daughter who was a British citizen had also passed away, leaving behind her 2 children and her partner. It was an unusual position that the appellant had found herself. 

It was decided by the appellant and her sponsor, to lodge an immigration application in the UK. The application was made in 2021 but refused late 2022, bringing the appeal in 2023.

At the First Tier Tribunal IAC Taylor House

The appeal went before Mr T J Cary Judge of the FtT, and the Home Office was also represented.

The appellant and her sponsor was represented by Shajjad Miah of ICS Legal. In our preliminary submissions, the Judge agreed that the matter would be considered in line with Article 8 ECHR, and s117B(6) of the Nationality, Immigration & Asylum Act 2002 was particularly relevant.

Mr T J Cary Judge of the FtT heard from both the appellant and her sponsor, both found to be credible in their evidence and was asked a number of questions by the Home Office. Re-cross examination was done by ICS Legal, so we can point out any errors in the defence statements. 

In our submission, we set out important aspects of our appeal skeleton argument and raised the appellant's right to family life, drawing the aspects of the ADR rules as being the governing policy in our appeal matter.

Consideration to the appellant's private life, as well as her family life with her grandchildren and wider family was given due consideration by Mr T J Cary Judge of the FtT. 

Home Office sat on the argument that she had not lived in the UK long enough and that she was capable of relocating as well as be supported by her sponsor, once she returns home. Further to that, stated there was nothing exceptional on the appeal matter and should be dismissed. 

Mr T J Cary Judge of the FtT, on paragraph 24 of his determination made the following statement:

"That discretion must be exercised on the basis of Article 8 considerations, in particular assessing all relevant factors in determining whether a decision is proportionate under Article 8.2. In such cases the basic framework of analysis contemplated by Lord Bingham in Huang (2007) UKHL 11 continues to apply requiring the application of the “step by step” approach suggested in Razgar [2004] UKHL 27. After applying the requirements of the rules, only if there may arguably be good grounds for granting leave to remain outside them is it necessary for Article 8 purposes to go on to consider whether there are “compelling circumstances” not sufficiently recognised under them. The exercise of discretion outside the rules variously described as "exceptional circumstances" or circumstances of "unjustifiable hardship" involves the Respondent applying a proportionality test by reference to Article 8."

ICS Legal made the following submission, reminding the Honourable Immigration Judge of an established matter and he confirmed those findings on paragraph 34 of his judgement:

"It was established in KO (Nigeria) [2018] UKSC 53 that s117B (6) is of particular significance. Where paragraphs (a) and (b) are satisfied, the Respondent cannot point to the public interest as requiring the removal of the person concerned. In determining whether those paragraphs are satisfied – in particular, whether it would “be reasonable to expect the child to leave”- the individual conduct of the person concerned does not play a part. Accordingly any issues with the Appellants immigration history does not prevent her relying on her relationship with the children as a means of avoiding removal. Nor is it relevant whether the children would, in practice, leave the United Kingdom in the event of his removal - see AB (Jamaica) [2019] EWCA Civ 661."

The appeal was allowed and the appellant had been granted leave to remain by the Home Office. 

Related Cases

Immigration Deportation Order, First Tier Tribunal determination dated 14th January 2013

Immigration Deportation Order  Case facts The Home Office served the Appellant on the 14t...
Read More

Appendix FM, family life as a Parent, First Tier Tribunal determination dated 5th Nov 2012

Appendix FM, family life as a Parent Case facts The Appellant held leave to remain under ...
Read More

Adult Dependant Relative, Appendix FM Immigration Rules, First Tier Tribunal determination dated 11th Oct 2019

Adult Dependant Relative, Appendix FM Immigration Rules Case facts The Sponsor applied for his...
Read More

Adult Dependant Relative on Human Rights Grounds, First Tier Tribunal determination dated 11th Sep 2019

Adult Dependant Relative on Human Rights Grounds Case facts The Appellant arrived in the UK as...
Read More

Private Life on Human Rights Grounds, First Tier Tribunal determination dated 20th Aug 2019

Private Life on Human Rights Grounds including a judicial review application Case facts The Ap...
Read More

ICS Legal : UK Immigration Advice | UK Visas | Partners & Marriage Visas | Tier 1 Start-up, Tier 1 Innovator & Tier 1 Investor Visas | British Citizenship. ICS Legal is part of ICS Legal Immigration Specialists Ltd. The content and the source codes contained in this page and subsequent pages of www.icslegal.com are the property of ICS Legal Immigration Specialists Ltd. Company Reg Company No. 08703375. Company Registered in England & Wales. By logging into the site, you have accepted our terms and conditions and must abide accordingly. Unauthorised reproduction and copying is strictly prohibited. Selective contents of the website have been re-produced in accordance to Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI). ICS Legal Immigration Specialists Ltd holds PSI Licence and licence number is C2009002244. Parliamentary Licence number is P2009000241. 

The content on our site is provided for general information only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Although we make reasonable efforts to update the information on our site, we make no representations, warranties or guarantees, whether express or implied, that the content on our site is accurate, complete or up-to-date. We do not guarantee that our site, or any content on it, will always be available or be uninterrupted. Access to our site is permitted on a temporary basis. We may suspend, withdraw, discontinue or change all or any part of our site without notice. We will not be liable to you if for any reason our site is unavailable at any time or for any period. You are responsible for making all arrangements necessary for you to have access to our site. You are also responsible for ensuring that all persons who access our site through your Internet connection are aware of these terms, and that they comply with them.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to receive our latest immigration alerts