Sebel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:31 pm
mubashir1981 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 11, 2020 5:17 pm
Hi everyone
Good news. My appeal against HO has been allowed 2day with fee award. HO wanted to make application under apendex fm.
Big Big thanks to snookey for his great help and support it was not possible without his help.I did not pay single penny to solicitor
Prepare skelton of argument all my self with anookey help.
Congratulations @mubashir1981 please I will need your help on how you went through the appeal process, I have been refused by HO and given 28days for AR from the 8th of june. Just saw their mail today as its went to my spam.thanks
This is the relevant law used by FTT judge in my appeal determination.
—(1) A person has a derivative right to reside during any period in which the person—
is not an exempt person; and
satisfies each of the criteria in one or more of paragraphs (2) to (6).
…………..
The criteria in this paragraph are that—
the person is the primary carer of a British citizen (“BC”);
BC is residing in the United Kingdom; and
BC would be unable to reside in the United Kingdom or in another EEA State if the person left the United Kingdom for an indefinite period.
So if u have limited leave to remain u still fufill the requirementa of the regulation.
As u r not an exempt person. Read snooky post for more details
I would say go for jr and i strongly recommend u if u really want euss then plz make drf1 application as well.
In my appeal jude said about patel case which HO use to abuse law.
Dealing with the point made in the RFRL, regarding the lack of an application under Appendix FM by the appellants, in my judgment, Patel is not to be read as importing an additional requirement that an applicant attempt to regularise their status before making an application for recognition of a derivative right of residence.
Similarly HO is also wrong to refuse derivative right for people who have limited leave to remain
Good luck