Discussion
24. We re-state the core issue in this appeal. W ith reference to para 352A (iii) of the Rules, can an individual rely on a relationship that merely “existed” immediately prior to the departure of that person from his/her country of former habitual residence , or must it be shown also to have been “ subsisting ” ? 25. In answering this question, we are bound to say at this stage that the drafting of the sub-para leaves something to be desired and indeed its very presence appears anomalous . 26. The principal interpretative approach to the Rules is well-settled. At para 10 of