IST wrote: ↑Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:45 pm
IST wrote: ↑Wed May 13, 2020 9:48 pm
snooky wrote: ↑Wed May 13, 2020 9:44 pm
IST wrote: ↑Wed May 13, 2020 9:02 pm
Hello guys.
Not a good news from me.
My application was refused too after 7 months dated 13th of May 2020
Currently on 2.5 leave to remain
It’s about 3pages
IST
Just take heart.
It's really upsetting to receive such news after months of waiting. The HO has made it hard for Zambrano people as I keep saying over here.
Question
How many months left on your 2,5 ltr
Thanks mate
Less then 3 months.
What do you suggest me to do? I don’t have the right of appeal just AR
Hi Snooky
I have submitted the AR application and still outstanding
EEA application still outstanding.
Will I be the exempt person as my partner hold as British Citizenship?
My partner has confirmed that if I will e returned to non EU country indefinite will follow me as will be no able to rise the kids without me.
Under the EEA regulation will the Judge allow my appeal when it comes for it as I am waiting for the EEA application?
Facts of Shah
Mr Shah is a TCN primary carer of his British citizen son. His wife is also a British national. Mr and Mrs Shah live with their infant son. Mrs Shah works full-time. Whilst Mrs Shah works, Mr Shah cares for their son.
The FTT found that if Mr Shah were to return to Pakistan, Mrs Shah would accompany her husband. Their child would also leave the UK. As a result, the FTT and UT found that Mr Shah derived a right to remain. The CA disagreed and held that Mrs Shah could look after the son in the UK; the requirement for compulsion to leave the UK was therefore not satisfied.
Judgment of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court unanimously allowed Mr Shah’s appeal and dismissed Mr Patel’s appeal.
The judgement of Lady Arden recognises that EU citizenship is a Treaty right, and that the Treaty article conferring citizenship, Article 20 TFEU, does not confer any rights on a TCN (R (Agyarko v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] 1 WLR 623) [§10].
Ist
If you read my post on exempt people, the regulations did not made mention about 16(7a). That was inserted by the Home Office.
“exempt person” is a person—
(i)who has a right to reside under another provision of these Regulations;
(ii)who has the right of abode under section 2 of the 1971 Act(1);
(iii)to whom section 8 of the 1971 Act(2), or an order made under subsection (2) of that section(3), applies; or
(iv)who has indefinite leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom
The supreme court threw out FTT decision accordingly and said they have erred.
Patel vs SSHD 16 December 2019 overruled FTT FTT decision and has said derivative can be given to anyone who derives a right to reside from a minor BC it doesn't matter if there's an exempt person within the family.
They went one saying that the assessment should be carried on the one seeking has the responsibility and the child depends on most.
It also said if by refusing the non exempted person and it will force the exempt out of uk with the non exempt INDEFINITE period, then the question of compelling and compulsion has engaged as insurmountable effects
The judge will allow your appeal under regulation 16, sec 55 and art 20 and with the Zambrano principles in December December patel ruling then 30 January ftt ruling of HO guidance been illegal and must be tore down