Case No. UKUT-00628-(IAC)

[2014] EWCA Civ 1292, nevertheless applied in the appeal before him and which he was bound to consider. With respect to section 117B(6)(a) he accepted that each of the appellant’s children was a “qualifying child” and that the appellant had a genuine and subsisting relationship with each child. He found that it would be unjustifiably harsh for the children to go to Jamaica and that it would not be reasonable to expect any one of the children to leave the United Kingdom. He noted that, in accordance with section 117B(6), the public interest did not, therefore, require the appellant’s removal. He then went on to consider proportionality and addressed each of the factors in section 117B. He considered the appellant’s criminal offending and the evidence in that regard. 24. The judge then concluded that “ it is therefore with considerable reluctance that I find the strength of the factors weighing in favour of his removal are outweighed by the appellant’s relationship with his children, in particular [LMC], taking account of their best interests and the provisions of Section 117B(6) .” Accordingly he allowed the appeal under Article 8.