There are two issues in these proceedings
There are two issues in these proceedings:
First, do the Immigration (Citizens' Rights Appeals) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (“the 2020 Regulations”) entitle an appellant to submit that a refusal of leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme (“the EUSS”) breaches Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the ECHR” or the “Convention”), other than as a “new matter” with the consent of the Secretary of State?
Secondly, does section 7(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 oblige the First-tier Tribunal to entertain free-standing submissions that a refusal of leave to remain, as opposed to the refusal of a “human rights claim” (as defined by section 113(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, “the 2002 Act”), is a breach of the ECHR?
These points are likely to be of broader relevance, particularly in relation to other statutory appeals brought in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber.
- Heading
- There are two issues in these proceedings
- Factual background
- Issues on appeal to the Upper Tribunal
- Issue (1): whether the appellant’s Article 8 submissions were a “new matter” requiring the consent of the Secretary of State
- Issue (1) submissions
- Article 8 not engaged by EUSS refusal decision
- Refusal of EUSS leave is not the refusal of a “human rights claim”
- Article 8 not “relevant to the substance of the decision appealed against”
- Issue (2): section 7(1) of the Human Rights Act
- Section 7(1) (b): a shield not a sword
- Conclusions
![[2023] UKUT 00293 (IAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_AioYBzS.png)