In this decision, we address
In this decision, we address:
The meaning of paragraph (b)(ii)(bb)(aaa) (“para. (aaa)”) in the definition of “durable partner” in Annex 1 to Appendix EU of the Immigration Rules (“the first issue”); and
Whether being subject to immigration bail under Schedule 10 to the Immigration Act 2016 (“the 2016 Act”) amounts to a “lawful basis of stay” for the purposes of para. (aaa) (“the second issue”).
The questions arise for consideration in the context of an appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State dated 23 June 2021 to refuse the appellant’s application for leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme (“the EUSS”) as a durable partner.
The appeal was originally heard and allowed by First-tier Tribunal Judge R. Sullivan (“Judge Sullivan”) under the Immigration (Citizens' Rights Appeals) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (“the 2020 Regulations”). The Secretary of State appealed to the Upper Tribunal. By a decision promulgated on 19 April 2023, Upper Tribunal Judge Rimington allowed the Secretary of State’s appeal, set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal, and directed that the matter be reheard in the Upper Tribunal, acting under section 12(2)(b)(ii) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. It was in those circumstances that the matter resumed before us.
We record our considerable gratitude to both advocates for the quality of their submissions.
- Heading
- In this decision, we address
- Factual background
- Principal controversial issues
- THE FIRST ISSUE
- Decisions of the Upper Tribunal: Basha, Drini and Kabir
- Para. (aaa): requirement for relevant document where no other lawful basis of stay
- Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules HC 1160
- Conclusion: para. (aaa)
- THE SECOND ISSUE
- Legal framework
- Immigration bail not a “lawful basis of stay” for the purposes of para. (aaa)
- Conclusion : para. (aaa) applied to the appellant’s case
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 00068 (IAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_AioYBzS.png)