[2023] UKUT 00293 (IAC)

What is the correct categorisation, for the purposes of the 2020 Regulations and the 2002 Act, of human rights-based submissions which do not amount to a “human rights claim” as defined in section 113(1) of the 2002 Act (that is, a claim relating to an individual’s prospective removal from the UK)?

Was determining whether Article 8 was engaged “relevant to the substance of the decision appealed against”?

A mere refusal of leave to remain under the EUSS is not, without more, a “human rights claim” under section 113(1) of the 2002 Act.

Consequently, the “new matter” regime does not regulate the Tribunal’s consideration of non-removal human rights submissions.

But the Tribunal may only consider matters which it thinks are “relevant to the substance of the decision appealed against”.

Whether Article 8 is engaged by a decision to refuse an EUSS application is not “relevant to the substance of the decision appealed against,” thereby preventing the Tribunal from considering it. The Tribunal does not enjoy a broad, unencumbered jurisdiction to consider non-removal human rights submissions at large.

In any event, Article 8 will not, without more, be engaged by a decision to refuse leave to remain under the EUSS.