Immigration Law Update Seminar | No8 Chambers | Bushra Ali ... Immigration... · Bushra Ali Group Immigration, Asylum & Human Rights Update Adam Pipe Adam Pipe No 8 Chambers adampipe.com

ImmigrationLawUpdateSeminar|No8Chambers|

BushraAliGroupImmigration,Asylum&HumanRightsUpdate

AdamPipe

AdamPipeNo8Chambersadampipe.com

HotoffthePress:LatestCaseLaw

• Article3HealthCases:ByeByeN!AM(Zimbabwe)vSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2020]UKSC17(29April2020)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2020/17.htmlAMZimbabweallowedremittedtoUT.NshouldbedepartedfrominthelightofPaposhvili• NewAfghanistanCGcaseAS(SafetyofKabul)Afghanistan(CG)[2020]UKUT130(IAC)(1May2020)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/130.htmlKabul:RiskfromTaliban– SeriousHarm– Relocation


Immigration,Asylum&HumanRightsUpdate

1. Article82. Asylum3. EEA4. Deportation5. Questions


Article8


Article8:BritishChildren,Chikwamba &Zambrano

Younas(section117B(6)(b);Chikwamba;Zambrano)Pakistan[2020]UKUT129(IAC)(24March2020)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/129.html

(1) AnappellantinanArticle8humanrightsappealwhoarguesthatthereisnopublicinterestinremovalbecauseafterleavingtheUKheorshewillbegrantedentryclearancemust,inallcases,addresstherelevantconsiderationsinPart5AoftheNationality,ImmigrationandAsylumAct2002("the2002Act")includingsection117B(1),whichstipulatesthat"themaintenanceofeffectiveimmigrationcontrolsisinthepublicinterest".Relianceon Chikwamba vSSHD [2008]UKHL40 doesnotobviatetheneedtodothis.


Younas(section117B(6)(b);Chikwamba;Zambrano)Pakistan[2020]UKUT129(IAC)(24March2020)

(2) Section117B(6)(b)ofthe2002ActrequiresacourtortribunaltoassumethatthechildinquestionwillleavetheUK: SecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartmentvAB(Jamaica)&Anor [2019]EWCACiv661and JG(s117B(6):"reasonabletoleave"UK)Turkey [2019]UKUT72(IAC).However,oncethatassumptionhasbeenmade,thecourtortribunalmustmovefromthehypotheticaltothereal:paragraph19of KO(Nigeria)&Ors vSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment [2018]UKSC53. ThelengthoftimeachildislikelytobeoutsidetheUKispartoftherealworldfactualcircumstancesinwhichachildwillfindherselfandisrelevanttodeciding,forthepurposeofsection117B(6)(b),whetheritwouldbeunreasonabletoexpectthechildtoleavetheUK.(3) Theassessmentofwhetherachild,asaresultofbeingcompelledtoleavetheterritoryoftheEuropeanUnion,willbeadeprivedofhisorhergenuineenjoymentoftherightsconferredbyArticle20TFEUinaccordancewith RuizZambranovOfficenationaldel'emploi (CaseC-34/09)fallstobeassessedbyconsideringtheactualfacts(includinghowlongachildislikelytobeoutsidetheterritoryoftheUnion),ratherthantheoreticalpossibilities.


Article8:§117BandtheReasonablenessQuestion

RunavSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2020]EWCACiv514(08April2020)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/514.html

§32‘Hesubmitsthatsection117B(6)istoberegardedasabenevolentprovision,whichcanonlyoperateinoneway,potentiallyinfavourofanappellantbutneveradverselytoanappellant.IwouldacceptMrAnderson'ssubmissioninthisregard.’


RunavSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2020]EWCACiv 514(08April2020)

33. ThisisimportantbecauseaconventionalArticle8(2)inquirycantakeintoaccount,aspartoftheoverallproportionalityexercise,otherpublicinterestconsiderations,includingtheconductoftheparentorparents.Undersection117B(6)thereisnoroomforsuchaninquirytotakeaccountoftheconductoftheparents:thatistheeffectofthedecisionoftheSupremeCourtin KO(Nigeria),whichoverruledtheearlierdecisionofthisCourtin MM(Uganda)vSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment [2016]EWCACiv617; [2016]ImmAR954 andinthatrespectapprovedwhathadbeensaidbyEliasLJin MA(Pakistan) (asthatcasewasknownbeforeitbecame KO(Nigeria) whenitwenttotheSupremeCourt),atpara.36.Undersection117B(6)theonlyquestionisfocussedonthechild:woulditbereasonabletoexpectthechildtoleavetheUK?IftheanswertothatisNo,thereisnoneedtogoontoconsiderArticle8(2)moregenerally.However,asamatterofprinciple,andasMrAndersonrightlysubmitted,iftheanswerisYes,therewillstillbearesidualscopeforArticle8(2)tobeconsidered.


RunavSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2020]EWCACiv 514(08April2020)

36.IwouldthereforerejectMrBiggs'sprimarysubmissionastotheinterpretationofsection117B(6).Iwould,however,accepthisalternativesubmission,thattheprovisioncallsforafact-findingexercisesothatthefullbackgroundfactsmustbeestablishedagainstwhichtheonlystatutoryquestionposedbythatprovisioncanthenbeaddressed.Iwouldemphasiseagain,astheSupremeCourtdidin KO(Nigeria) andthisCourtdidin MA(Pakistan) and AB(Jamaica) that,oncealltherelevantfactshavebeenfound,theonlyquestionwhicharisesundersection117(6)(b)iswhetherornotitwouldbereasonabletoexpectthe child toleavetheUK.Thefocushastobeonthechild.

37.IwouldalsoacceptMrBiggs'ssubmissionthatthetestundersection117B(6)isnotwhetherthereare"insurmountableobstacles"tothemaintenanceoffamilylifeoutsidetheUK.ThatwouldbesoeveninanordinaryArticle8case:see GM atparas.42-52,inparticularparas.43-44(GreenLJ).ThatisallthemoresoinacasewhichisnotaconventionalArticle8(2)onebutarisesundersection117B(6).


Article8:AdultsandFosterCarers(pluscredibilityanderrorsoflaw)

UddinvTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2020]EWCACiv 338(12March2020)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/338.html11.Inoteinthatregardtheconventionalwarningwhichjudgesgivethemselvesthata

personmaybeuntruthfulaboutonematter(inthiscasehishistory)withoutnecessarilybeinguntruthfulaboutanother(inthiscasetheexistenceoffamilylifewiththefostermother'sfamily),knownasa'Lucasdirection'(derivedinpartfromthejudgmentoftheCACDin RvLucas [1981]QB720perLordLaneCJat723C).Theclassicformulationoftheprincipleissaidtobethis:ifacourtconcludesthatawitnesshasliedaboutonematter,itdoesnotfollowthathehasliedabouteverything.Awitnessmaylieformanyreasons,forexample,outofshame,humiliation,misplacedloyalty,panic,fear,distress,confusionandemotionalpressure.Thatisbecauseaperson'smotivesmaybedifferentasrespectsdifferentquestions.Thewarningisnottobefoundinthejudgmentsbeforethiscourt.Thisisperhapsausefulopportunitytoemphasisethattheutilityoftheself-directionisofgeneralapplicationandnotlimitedtofamilyandcriminalcases.


UddinvTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2020]EWCACiv 338(12March2020)

15.ThedeputyJudgealsoheldthattheFtT's determinationwascarefullypreparedbyaveryexperiencedjudgewhomadeameticulousandbalancedassessmentoftheevidenceintheround.Ientirelyconcurwiththeimportofhisobservationinsofarasitrecognisesthattribunaljudgesarespecialistjudgeswhoareexpectedtoknowtheexpertmaterialsintheirfieldsuchthatanappellatecourtshouldhaveappropriateregardforthatspecialistexperience.Thatisquitedifferentfromanimplicationthatthereisafactortobeconsideredinanappealthatexperiencedjudgesshouldnotbeexpectedtomakeamistake.Incommentingthatit"wouldhavebeenanelementaryandunlikelyerrorforanyjudgeinajurisdictionwhichrevolvesaroundArticle8ECHRissues"hewasapplyinganassumptionwhichisaninappropriateapproachtoanappeal.



31.Dependency,inthe Kugathas sense,isaccordinglynotatermofart.Itisaquestionoffact,amatterofsubstancenotform.TheirreducibleminimumofwhatfamilylifeimpliesremainsthatwhichSedleyLJdescribedasbeingwhethersupportisrealoreffectiveorcommitted.

32.Subsequentcaselawhasbuiltuponbutnotdetractedfrom Kugathas.In Ghising [2012]UKUT00160(IAC),LangJsittingwithUpperTribunalJudgeJordanintheUTconsideredtheauthoritiessince Kugathas.Theyobservedthatfamilylifebetweenadultchildrenandtheirbirthparentswillreadilybefoundwithoutevidenceofexceptionaldependence.Insofarasithasbeensuggestedthat Kugathas hadeverdescribedarigidtestofexceptionaldependency,thiswasdispelledandIrespectfullyagreewiththeirconclusionthateachcaseisfactsensitive.



34.TheSecretaryofStategoesfurtherandsubmitsthatfostercareisa"specialcategory",inwhichitisincumbentuponanappellanttoprovefamilylifeinawaythatwouldotherwisebepresumedinabirthfamily.Icanfindnosupportforthispropositioninthecaselaw.Theprinciplesin Kugathas, asdescribedinthejudgmentstowhichIhavereferred,areofgeneralapplication.Icandiscernnointention,articulatedorimplied,tolimitthetestofrealoreffectiveorcommittedsupporttobirthfamilies.Rather,atparagraph[18]of Kugathas thecourtdescribesthespecialcasewhichistheconverseofthatassertedbytheSecretaryofState,namelythatinsomecasesanaturaltiebetweenparentandinfantmaydisplacetheprincipleofgeneralapplicationthatafamilylifewillneedtobeprovedbasedonthesubstanceoftherelationshipasserted.

35.…36.Theexistenceoffamilylifeafterayoungpersonhasachievedhisorhermajorityisaquestionoffact.Thereisnopresumption,eitherpositiveornegative,forthepurposesofArticle8.Continuedcohabitationwillbeahighlymaterialfactortobetakenintoaccountandwhilenotdeterminative,ayoungadultstillcohabitingwithafamilybeyondtheattainmentofmajorityislikelytobeindicativeofthecontinuedbondsofeffective,realorcommittedsupportthatunderpinafamilylife.



40. Accordingly,thefollowingprinciplescanbedescribedfromtheauthorities:i. ThetestfortheestablishmentofArticle8familylifeinthe Kugathas senseis

oneofeffective,realorcommittedsupport.Thereisnorequirementtoproveexceptionaldependency.

ii. Thetestforfamilylifewithinthefostercarecontextisnodifferenttothatofbirthfamilies:thecourtortribunallookstothesubstanceoftherelationshipandnosignificantdeterminativeweightistobegiventotheformalcommercialityofafosterarrangement.Itissimplyafactualquestiontobeconsidered,ifrelevant,alongsideallothers.

iii. Thecontinuedexistenceoffamilylifeaftertheattainmentofmajorityisalsoarelevantquestionoffact.Nonegativeinferenceshouldbedrawnfromthemerefactoftheattainmentofmajority,whilecontinuingcohabitationafteradulthoodwillbesuggestiveofongoingreal,effectiveorcommittedsupportwhichisthehallmarkofafamilylife.


Article8:proportionality,insurmountableobstaclesandlittleweight

GM(SriLanka)vTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2019]EWCACiv 1630(04October2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1630.html

Seealso:LalvTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2019]EWCACiv 1925(08November2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1925.html


GM(SriLanka)vTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2019]EWCACiv 1630(04October2019)

29. Third,thetestforanassessmentoutsidetheIRiswhethera"fairbalance"isstruckbetweencompetingpublicandprivateinterests.Thisisaproportionalitytest: Agyarko (ibid)paragraphs[41]and[60];seealso Aliparagraphs [32],[47]- [49].InordertoensurethatreferencesintheIRandinpolicytoacasehavingtobe"exceptional"beforeleavetoremaincanbegranted,areconsistentwithArticle8,theymustbeconstruedas not imposinganyincrementalrequirementoverandabovethatarisingoutoftheapplicationofanArticle8proportionalitytest,forinstancethattherebe"somehighlyunusual"or"unique" factororfeature: Agyarko(ibid)paragraphs[56]and[60].

30.Fourth,theproportionalitytestistobeappliedonthe"circumstancesoftheindividualcase": Agyarko (ibid)paragraphs[47]and[60].Thefactsmustbeevaluatedina"realworld"sense: EV(Philippines)vSSHD[2014]EWCACiv874 atparagraph[58]("EVPhilippines").



(iii)Theapplicationofsection117B(4)and(5)andtheweighttobeattachedtofamilylifecreatedwhenimmigrationstatuswasprecarious36. MrJafferji,whilstacknowledgingthatthereasoningoftheFTTwasambiguous,

arguedthattakenasawholeanduponafairreadingtheJudgewronglyappliedthe"littleweight"provisionsofsection117B(4)and(5)tothegeneralityoftheevidencerelatingtofamilylifeandinsodoingmadeanerroroflawandalsoofassessment.Onourreadingofthetextofthejudgmentitisunclearwhetherthejudgedidimproperlydiscountthefamilylifeevidencebyreferencetosection117B(4)and/or(5).Butwedoseehowthecriticismcouldwellbecorrect.TheJudgedidrefertosections117BanditisofsomerelevancethattheUTconstruedthejudgmentasapplyingsection117B(4)and(5).Thestartingpointisthatneithersectionhasanymaterialrelevanceinthecontextofafamilylifecasesuchasthepresent.In Rhuppiah theCourtclarifiedthatthe"littleweight"provisioninsection117B(4)appliedonlytoprivatelife,orarelationshipformedwithaqualifyingpartner,establishedwhenthepersonwasintheUnitedKingdom unlawfully.Itdidnotthereforeapplywhenfamilylifewascreatedduringa precarious residenceie.atemporary,non-settled,but lawful,residence,whichisthecaseinthisappeal.Atparagraph[22]theCourtheld:



47. IndomesticlawananalysisofwhetherapersonconfrontedwithinsurmountableobstaclestoreturnarisesundertheIRwheretheindividualconcernedisresidentin breach oftheIR: Agyarko paragraphs[44]and[45].Theinsurmountableobstaclesassessmentamountstoafree-standingprimafacietest.ItisprimafaciebecausetoensurethattheIRarecompatiblewithArticle8,evenwhereresidenceisinbreachoftherules,leavecanbegrantedinexceptionalcircumstanceswhereremovalwouldresultin"unjustifiablyharshconsequences"orwherethefamilywouldface"veryserioushardship"or"verysignificantdifficultiesincontinuingfamilylifeoutsidetheUK": Agyarko (ibid)paragraphs[45]and[48].

48.InrelationtothepositionunderArticle8 outside theIR,underECHRcaselawtheextenttowhichobstaclestoreturncanbeovercomeissimplya"relevantfactor"inrelationto"non-settled"applicants;itisnot thetest: Agyarko paragraph[48].


Asylum


CountryGuidance&ChristianConversionPS(Christianity- risk)IranCG[2020]UKUT46(IAC)(20February2020)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/46.html1. ThiscountryguidanceappliestoprotectionclaimsfromIranianswhoclaimtohaveconvertedfromIslamtoChristianity.2. Insofarastheyrelatetonon-ethnicChristians,thisdecisionreplacesthecountryguidancedecisionsin FSandOthers(Iran- ChristianConverts)Iran CG [2004]UKIAT00303 and SZandJM(Christians- FSconfirmed)Iran CG [2008]UKAIT00082 whicharenolongertobefollowed.3. DecisionmakersshouldbeginbydeterminingwhethertheclaimanthasdemonstratedthatitisreasonablylikelythatheorsheisaChristian. Ifthatburdenisdischargedthefollowingconsiderationsapply:i) AconverttoChristianityseekingtoopenlypracticethatfaithinIranwouldfacearealriskofpersecution.ii) Iftheclaimantwouldinfactconcealhisfaith,decision-makersshouldconsiderwhy. Ifanypartoftheclaimant’smotivationisafearofsuchpersecution,theappealshouldbeallowed.iii) Iftheclaimantwouldchoosetoconcealhisfaithpurelyforotherreasons(familypressure,socialconstraints,personal preferenceetc)thenprotectionshouldberefused.The evidencedemonstratesthatprivateandsolitaryworship,withintheconfinesofthehome,ispossibleandwouldnotingeneralentailarealriskofpersecution.


PS(Christianity- risk)IranCG[2020]UKUT46(IAC)(20February2020)

4. Incaseswheretheclaimantisfoundtobeinsincereinhisorherclaimedconversion,thereisnotarealriskofpersecution‘in-country’.TherebeingnoreasonforsuchanindividualtoassociatehimselfwithChristians,thereisnotarealriskthathewouldcometotheadverseattentionoftheIranianauthorities.Decision-makersmustneverthelessconsiderthepossiblerisksarisingatthe‘pinchpoint’ ofarrival:

i) Allreturningfailedasylumseekersaresubjecttoquestioningonarrival,andthiswillincludequestionsaboutwhytheyclaimedasylum;

ii) AreturneewhodivulgesthatheclaimedtobeaChristianisreasonablylikelytobetransferredforfurtherquestioning;

iii) ThereturneecanbeexpectedtosignanundertakingrenouncinghisclaimedChristianity.Thequestioningwillthereforeingeneralbeshortandwillnotentailarealriskofill-treatment;

iv) Ifthereareanyreasonswhythedetentionbecomesprolonged,theriskofill-treatmentwillcorrespondinglyrise.Factorsthatcouldresultinprolongeddetentionmustbedeterminedonacasebycasebasis.Theycouldincludebutarenotlimitedto:

a) PreviousadversecontactwiththeIraniansecurityservices;

b) ConnectiontopersonsofinteresttotheIranianauthorities;

c) AttendanceatachurchwithperceivedconnectiontoIranianhousechurches;

d) Overt socialmediacontentindicatingthattheindividualconcernedhasactivelypromotedChristianity.


MH(review;sliprule;churchwitnesses)Iran[2020]UKUT125(IAC)(11March2020)

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/125.html

(i) Part4oftheTribunalProcedure(First-tierTribunal)(ImmigrationandAsylumChamber)Rules2014containsa'toolkit'ofpowers,theproperuseofwhichsavestimeandexpenseandfurtherstheoverridingobjective.(ii) AjudgeoftheFtT whoismindedtograntpermissiontoappealonthebasisofaseeminglyobviouserroroflawshouldconsiderwhether,instead,toreviewthedecisionunderappealpursuanttorule35.(iii) AdecisionwhichcontainsaclericalmistakeorotheraccidentalsliporomissionmaybecorrectedbytheFtT underrule31(the'sliprule').Whereadecisionconcludesbystatinganoutcomewhichisclearlyatoddswiththeintentionofthejudge,theFtT maycorrectsuchanerrorunderrule31,ifnecessarybyinvokingrule36soastotreatanapplicationforpermissiontoappealasanapplicationunderrule31.Insofaras Katsonga [2016]UKUT228(IAC) heldotherwise,itshouldnolongerbefollowed.(iv) Writtenandoralevidencegivenby'churchwitnesses'ispotentiallysignificantincasesofChristianconversion(see TF&MAvSSHD [2018]CSIH58).Suchevidenceisnotaptlycharacterisedasexpertevidence,norisitnecessarilydeservingofparticularweight,andtheweighttobeattachedtosuchevidenceisforthejudicialfact-finder.


CessationofRefugeeStatus

MirrorImageApproach:IsRelocationAlternativeAvailable?SecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartmentvMS(Somalia)[2019]EWCACiv 1345(29July2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1345.html

SB(refugeerevocation;IDPcamps)Somalia[2019]UKUT358(IAC)(14October2019)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2019/358.html


EEA


TheSupremeCourtonZambrano &Compulsion

PatelvSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2019]UKSC59(16December2019)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2019/59.htmlTheSupremeCourtreliedupontherecentdecisionfromtheCJEUinKAvBelgium CaseC-82/16,[2018]3CMLR28.WhatliesattheheartoftheZambranojurisprudenceistherequirementthattheEUcitizenbecompelledtoleavetheEUterritoryifthethird-countrynational,withwhomtheEUcitizenhasarelationshipofdependency,isremoved[22].InKAtheCJEUdrewadistinctionbetweenanadultUnioncitizenandaUnioncitizenwhoisachild.ThedecisioninChavez-Vilchez CaseC-133/15,[2018]QB103isaboutchildren.Chavez-Vilchez doesnotrelaxthelevelofcompulsionrequiredinthecaseofadultsanditwillonlybein“exceptionalcircumstances”thatsuchacasewouldsucceed[27].ThePatelappealthereforefailed.InShahtheSupremeCourtfoundthattheCourtofAppealwaswrongtoconsiderthatMrsShah’sdecisiontoleavewouldbevoluntaryandthatthereforetherewasnocompulsion.Theoverarchingquestionwaswhetherthesonwouldbecompelledtoleavewithhisfather,whowashisprimarycarer.Inansweringthatquestion,theSupremeCourthadtotakeintoaccountthechild’sbestsinterestsandhisrelationshipwitheachparent(Chavez-Vilchez para71).Thecompulsiontestispractical.Itistobeappliedtotheactualfacts.TheFirst-tierTribunalfoundthesonwouldbecompelledtoleave.ThatissufficientcompulsionforthepurposesofZambrano[30].TheShahcasewasthereforesuccessful.


Chen childrencanrelyupontheunlawfulincomeofparent

Bajratari (CitizenshipoftheUnion- Rightofresidenceofathird-countrynationalwhoisadirectrelative- Judgment)[2019]EUECJC-93/18(02October2019)http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2019/C9318.htmlArticle 7(1)(b)ofDirective2004/38/EC…mustbeinterpretedasmeaningthataUnioncitizenminorhassufficientresourcesnottobecomeanunreasonableburdenonthesocialassistancesystemofthehostMemberStateduringhisperiodofresidence,despitehisresourcesbeingderivedfromincomeobtainedfromtheunlawfulemploymentofhisfather,athird-countrynationalwithoutaresidencecardandworkpermit.


SurinderSinghcasesandthe‘centreoflife’requirement

ZA(Reg9.EEARegs;abuseofrights)Afghanistan[2019]UKUT281(IAC)(31July2019)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2019/281.html(i) Therequirementtohavetransferredthecentreofone'slifetothehostmemberstateisnotarequirementofEUlaw,norisitendorsedbytheCJEU.(ii) WhereanEUnationalofonestate("thehomememberstate")hasexercisedtherightoffreedomofmovementtotakeupworkorself-employmentinanotherEUstate("thehoststate"),hisorherfamilymembershaveaderivativerighttoenterthememberstateiftheexerciseofTreatyrightsinthehoststatewas"genuine"inthesensethatitwasreal,substantive,oreffective.ItisforanappellanttoshowthattherehadbeenagenuineexerciseofTreatyrights.


ZA(Reg9.EEARegs;abuseofrights)Afghanistan[2019]UKUT281(IAC)(31July2019)

(iii) Thequestionofwhetherfamilylifewasestablishedand/orstrengthened,andwhethertherehasbeenagenuineexerciseofTreatyrightsrequiresaqualitativeassessmentwhichwillbefact-specificandwillneedtobearinmindthefollowing:(1) Anyworkorself-employmentmusthavebeen"genuineandeffective"andnotmarginalorancillary;(2) TheassessmentofwhetherastayinthehoststatewasgenuinedoesnotinvolveanassessmentoftheintentionsofthepartiesoverandaboveaconsiderationofwhetherwhattheyintendedtodowasinfacttoexerciseTreatyrights;(3) ThereisnorequirementfortheEUnationalorhisfamilytohaveintegratedintothehostmemberstate,norforthesoleplaceofresidencetobeinthehoststate;thereisnorequirementtohaveseveredtieswiththehomememberstate;albeitthatthesefactorsmay,toalimiteddegree,berelevanttothequalitativeassessmentofwhethertheexerciseofTreatyrightswasgenuine.(iv) Ifitisallegedthatthestayinthehostmemberstatewassuchthatreg.9(4)applies,theburdenisontheSecretaryofStatetoshowthattherewasanabuseofrights.


RetainedRightsandDocumentation

Rehman(EEARegulations2016- specifiedevidence:Pakistan)[2019]UKUT195(IAC)(08April2019)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2019/195.html

Theprinciplesoutlinedin BarnettandOthers(EEARegulations;rightsanddocumentation) [2012]UKUT142 areequallyapplicabletoTheImmigration(EuropeanEconomicArea)Regulations2016.Section1ofSchedule1totheseregulationsprovidesthatthesolegroundofappealisthatthedecisionbreachestheappellant'srightsundertheEUTreatiesinrespectofentrytoorresidenceintheUnitedKingdom.Theprovisionscontainedinregulations21and42mustbeinterpretedinthelightofEuropeanUnionlaw.Insomecases,thismightinvolveignoringtherequirementforspecifiedevidencealtogetherifadocumentisnotinfactrequiredtoestablisharightofresidence.


Deportation


UndulyHarsh?

SecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartmentvPG(Jamaica)[2019]EWCACiv 1213(11July2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1213.html

SecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartmentvKF(Nigeria)[2019]EWCACiv 2051(22November2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/2051.html


SecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartmentvPG(Jamaica)[2019]EWCACiv 1213(11July2019)

‘Irecogniseofcoursethehumanrealitiesofthesituation,andIdonotdoubtthatSATandthethreechildrenwillsuffergreatdistressifPGisdeported.NordoIdoubtthattheirliveswillinanumberofwaysbemademoredifficultthantheyareatpresent.Butthose,sadly,arethelikelyconsequencesofthedeportationofanyforeigncriminalwhohasagenuineandsubsistingrelationshipwithapartnerand/orchildreninthiscountry...Manyparentsofteenagechildrenareconfrontedwithdifficultiesandupsettingeventsofonesortoranother,andhavetofaceoneormoreoftheirchildrengoingthrough“adifficultperiod”foronereasonoranother,andthefactthataparentwhoisaforeigncriminalwillnolongerbeinapositiontoassistinsuchcircumstancescannotofitselfmeanthattheeffectsofhisdeportationareundulyharshforhispartnerand/orchildren.’[39]Holroyde LJ


UndulyHarsh:LatestfromtheUT

Patel(Britishcitizenchild- deportation)[2020]UKUT45(IAC)(29January2020)http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/45.html(4)ThepossessionofBritishcitizenshipbyachildwithwhomaperson(P)hasagenuineandsubsistingparentalrelationshipdoesnotmeanthatPisexempted fromthe'undulyharsh'requirements.EventhoughthechildmaybeBritish,ithastobeundulyharshbothforhimorhertoleavewithPortostaywithoutP;notjustharsh.Thus,somesubstantialinterferencewiththerightsandexpectationsthatcomewithbeingBritishispossible,withoutthepositionbecomingoneof undue harshnesstothechild.


Imran(Section117C(5);children,undulyharsh:Pakistan)[2020]UKUT83(IAC)(11February2020)

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/IAC/2020/83.html1.TobringacasewithinException2ins.117C(5)oftheNationality,ImmigrationandAsylumAct2002,the'undulyharsh'testwillnotbesatisfied,inacasewhereachildhastwoparents,byeitherorbothofthefollowing,withoutmore:(i)evidenceoftheparticularimportanceofoneparentinthelivesofthechildren;and(ii)evidenceoftheemotionaldependenceofthechildrenonthatparentandoftheemotionalharmthatwouldbelikelytoflowfromseparation.

2.Considerationastowhatconstitutes'withoutmore'isafactsensitiveassessment.


Publicinterestindeportation:fixedormoveable?

AkinyemivTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2019]EWCACiv 2098(04December2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/2098.html‘Thecorrectapproachtobetakentothe‘publicinterest’inthebalancetobeundertakenbyatribunalistorecognisethatthepublicinterestinthedeportationofforeigncriminalshasamoveableratherthanfixedquality.Itisnecessarytoapproachthepublicinterestflexibly,recognisingthattherewillbecaseswheretheperson’scircumstancesintheindividualcasereducethelegitimateandstrongpublicinterestinremoval.Thenumberofthesecaseswillnecessarilybeveryfewi.e.theywillbeexceptionalhavingregardtothelegislationandtheRules.Iagreewiththeappellantthatthepresentappealissuchacase.’[39]SirErnestRyder SPT


Criminality&SocialandCulturalIntegration

CI(Nigeria)vTheSecretaryofStatefortheHomeDepartment[2019]EWCACiv 2027(22November2019)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/2027.html‘Thejudgeshouldsimplyhaveaskedwhether– havingregardtohisupbringing,education,employmenthistory,historyofcriminaloffendingandimprisonment,relationshipswithfamilyandfriends,lifestyleandanyotherrelevantfactors– CIwasatthetimeofthehearingsociallyandculturallyintegratedintheUK.Thejudgeshouldnot,asheappearstohavedone,havetreatedCI’soffendingandimprisonmentashavingseveredhissocialandculturaltieswiththeUKthroughitsverynature,irrespectiveofitsactualeffectsonCI’srelationshipsandaffiliations– andthenrequiredhimtodemonstratethatintegrativelinkshadsincebeen“re-formed”.’[77]LeggattLJ


Questions?AdamPipeNo8Chambers

adampipe.com,[email protected],http://www.twitter.com/adampipe,http://uk.linkedin.com/in/pipeadam/


Documents

Immigration Law Update Seminar | No8 Chambers | Bushra Ali ... Immigration... · Bushra Ali Group Immigration, Asylum & Human Rights Update Adam Pipe Adam Pipe No 8 Chambers adampipe.com