ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Case law on marriages of conveniece

Use this section for any queries concerning the EU Settlement Scheme, for applicants holding pre-settled and settled status.

Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix

Locked
EUsmileWEallsmile
Moderator
Posts: 6019
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:22 pm

Case law on marriages of conveniece

Post by EUsmileWEallsmile » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:55 pm

I found this interesting...

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

ECO deciding marriage of convenience without basis.

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:17 pm

This is a very important case. It makes clear in UK law that UKBA can not reject EEA FP visa applications from married couples just because the did not include a whole lot of unneeded excess documentation. All that is needed, in most cases, is the marriage certificate
10. When Mr Hopkin opened his submissions for the Entry Clearance Officer, we indicated that we were very surprised at the refusal decision, which seemed to be based on a failure to understand the relevant principles of European Union law and the material parts of the determination in IS.

11. Mr Hopkin realistically acknowledged that the refusal of the entry clearance was indefensible on its facts, although he reserved the right to argue that a failure to produce relevant evidence could justify the refusal of an EEA application, and submitted IS was properly decided when it placed the burden of proof on the claimant.

Jambo
Respected Guru
Posts: 8734
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:31 am

Post by Jambo » Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:44 pm

I wonder what went through the ECO mind when he declared a 14 years marriage as marriage of convenience...

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:46 pm

I think the ECOs are not always very well trained.

Laura721
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:08 pm

Post by Laura721 » Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:37 pm

Worrying! Can't wait to see what they tell us. When we apply for FP we will have been married for 1 day, but in a relationship for almost 11 years. I definately think they are going to reject ours thinking its a marriage of convenience.

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:16 pm

Laura721 wrote:Worrying! Can't wait to see what they tell us. When we apply for FP we will have been married for 1 day, but in a relationship for almost 11 years. I definately think they are going to reject ours thinking its a marriage of convenience.
Relax and enjoy the wait. And read carefully this very clearly written decision relevant to your case: http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=95864

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 15163
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Post by Obie » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:52 pm

Laura721 wrote:Worrying! Can't wait to see what they tell us. When we apply for FP we will have been married for 1 day, but in a relationship for almost 11 years. I definately think they are going to reject ours thinking its a marriage of convenience.
This Judgement established that you should be given the opportunity to address any concerns the Secretary of State has about the genuine nature of your marriage.

In theory you will be required to provide evidence of your 11 years relationship.

If you are able to do so, and prove on a balance of probabilities that your marriage is genuine, then there is no reason why a refusal will stand.
Smooth seas do not make skilful sailors

Laura721
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:08 pm

Post by Laura721 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:56 am

Directive/2004/38/EC wrote:
Laura721 wrote:Worrying! Can't wait to see what they tell us. When we apply for FP we will have been married for 1 day, but in a relationship for almost 11 years. I definately think they are going to reject ours thinking its a marriage of convenience.
Relax and enjoy the wait. And read carefully this very clearly written decision relevant to your case: http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=95864
Thank you, but the link seems to be to this same thread, is that the right one. Please resend if not!!

Laura721
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:08 pm

Post by Laura721 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 12:01 pm

Obie wrote:
Laura721 wrote:Worrying! Can't wait to see what they tell us. When we apply for FP we will have been married for 1 day, but in a relationship for almost 11 years. I definately think they are going to reject ours thinking its a marriage of convenience.
This Judgement established that you should be given the opportunity to address any concerns the Secretary of State has about the genuine nature of your marriage.

In theory you will be required to provide evidence of your 11 years relationship.

If you are able to do so, and prove on a balance of probabilities that your marriage is genuine, then there is no reason why a refusal will stand.
Obie, I guess the main query is - do I provide some evidence when we submit our passports, marriage certificate etc. Or do I mention it all in the cover letter only, wait for them to reject and appeal/re apply with documents from Spain that we are registered at same address for last 2 years, photos, plane tickets, etc.

Our lease contract could only be between me and owner, though I have a letter from her confirming he has been living with me the whole time. I also have a letter from the Albanian Embassy in Madrid confirming this. All bills are in my name, they would not let me add him because he doesn't have residency here.

EUsmileWEallsmile
Moderator
Posts: 6019
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:22 pm

Post by EUsmileWEallsmile » Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:34 pm

Jambo wrote:I wonder what went through the ECO mind when he declared a 14 years marriage as marriage of convenience...
While I'm not a mind reader, I suspect the ECO may have been expecting the application to look like what a spouse would have to submit under the immigration rules. They appear not to have understood EU case law or their internal guidance.

EUsmileWEallsmile
Moderator
Posts: 6019
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:22 pm

Post by EUsmileWEallsmile » Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:40 pm

Laura721 wrote:
Obie wrote:
Laura721 wrote:Worrying! Can't wait to see what they tell us. When we apply for FP we will have been married for 1 day, but in a relationship for almost 11 years. I definately think they are going to reject ours thinking its a marriage of convenience.
This Judgement established that you should be given the opportunity to address any concerns the Secretary of State has about the genuine nature of your marriage.

In theory you will be required to provide evidence of your 11 years relationship.

If you are able to do so, and prove on a balance of probabilities that your marriage is genuine, then there is no reason why a refusal will stand.
Have you made your application or not? If not, explain your circumstances in a covering letter and you should be fine. If your marriage is genuine, you will have nothing to worry about. If the ECO has doubts, they need to express them. You would then be able to counter their arguments.

The essence of the case was that ECO cannot just say they think one has been party to a marriage of convenience without justification. If justifiable reasons are presented, then the applicant would be expected to provide evidence to the contrary.



Obie, I guess the main query is - do I provide some evidence when we submit our passports, marriage certificate etc. Or do I mention it all in the cover letter only, wait for them to reject and appeal/re apply with documents from Spain that we are registered at same address for last 2 years, photos, plane tickets, etc.

Our lease contract could only be between me and owner, though I have a letter from her confirming he has been living with me the whole time. I also have a letter from the Albanian Embassy in Madrid confirming this. All bills are in my name, they would not let me add him because he doesn't have residency here.

EUsmileWEallsmile
Moderator
Posts: 6019
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:22 pm

Post by EUsmileWEallsmile » Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:45 pm

Directive/2004/38/EC wrote:This is a very important case. It makes clear in UK law that UKBA can not reject EEA FP visa applications from married couples just because the did not include a whole lot of unneeded excess documentation. All that is needed, in most cases, is the marriage certificate
10. When Mr Hopkin opened his submissions for the Entry Clearance Officer, we indicated that we were very surprised at the refusal decision, which seemed to be based on a failure to understand the relevant principles of European Union law and the material parts of the determination in IS.

11. Mr Hopkin realistically acknowledged that the refusal of the entry clearance was indefensible on its facts, although he reserved the right to argue that a failure to produce relevant evidence could justify the refusal of an EEA application, and submitted IS was properly decided when it placed the burden of proof on the claimant.
Did you note the point made about residence cards? Don't think it changes anything just now, but it appeared to suggest that residence cards could be used in lieu of visa - could it possibly have meant non-EU issued ones?

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Fri Feb 17, 2012 12:25 am

Do anyone have a caselaw regarding a residence card were both spouse are in the uk? Can 2yrs evidence of coabitation in uk be use in the court if HO say marriage of convinience?
All i have read is about family permit what about the one of residence card or are both caselaw use for a residence card too?

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Fri Feb 17, 2012 12:09 pm

irene_hamm wrote:Do anyone have a caselaw regarding a residence card were both spouse are in the uk? Can 2yrs evidence of coabitation in uk be use in the court if HO say marriage of convinience?
All i have read is about family permit what about the one of residence card or are both caselaw use for a residence card too?
Are they already in the UK and the RC has been issued? Or are you asking about a visa?

Once the EEA FP has been issued, it is unlikely that UKBA would then refuse to issue the RC. Unless they thought it was truely a marriage of convenience and they made a mistake to issue the FP.

Why don't you create a new thread if you would like to discuss.

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 15163
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Post by Obie » Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:21 pm

irene_hamm wrote:Do anyone have a caselaw regarding a residence card were both spouse are in the uk? Can 2yrs evidence of coabitation in uk be use in the court if HO say marriage of convinience?
All i have read is about family permit what about the one of residence card or are both caselaw use for a residence card too?
This caselaw applies mutatis mutandis to Residence Card application also, as they are all EU documentation. The guidance cited in the judgement concerned the issue of residence documents.
Smooth seas do not make skilful sailors

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:03 am

Thank you for the reply, i dont think i should open a new post as my question is on this same post here. Why i ask this is bcus i have not seen any caselaw regarding marriage of convenience which is on residence card most are resident permit. The different i see here is that resident permit are visa issue when you are coming in and residence card is when you are already in, but what i want to know is about a case law of residence card on this same issue were HO have no evidence to prove the couples are not together but still insist is a marriage of convenience. Will they be able to remove without showing a fact beyound unreasonable doubt that they are really not together in the court? But of which they are living together as a married couple but due to adverse immigration history HO is calling it a marriage of convinience.

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:29 pm

I think my comment and question is hard to answer. The fact still remain that the HO can easily say someone that is looking to come into the country will not coming bcus its marriage of convenience without proving it easy for them bcus his/she not yet in but what of someone that is already in the country will the HO not prove it that it is marriage of convenience before deporting? Is suppecious only okay for them to deport? I think someone here should have an experience of this, bcus i know by the rule of law, not tribunals but real court like high court or supreme court you have to prove beyound any reasonable doubt that what you say is true with evidence that they are not really together. Has any case been to that level and HO win base on suspecious.

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Do anyone have a legal advice on this? Marriage of Convenience eea caselaw base on incountry application a.k.a residence card pls.

Jambo
Respected Guru
Posts: 8734
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:31 am

Post by Jambo » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:33 pm

Why are worried so much? Anything unusual in your relationship that would make the HO suspicious of it?

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:27 am

I am not worried, i ask a question nobody have seems to be able to answer, i have read on this forum wereby HO say marriage of convinience to incountry application with no evidence. This questing has been on my mind without getting a good answer. Am an eu national and living with my husband now for 2yrs but because of my husband has claim asylum and witdraw it after we got married HO say it is marriage of convinience and my solicitior wasnt helpful by not providing the evidence we gave to him, there are alot of evidence prove we are together but HO never check on us, interview or anything. This was why i ask, he is in the country and we live together, he has no money and i am the one that care for him morally and financially. This is why i ask this question, can someone be deport base on suspecious? Even the tribunal eer to them this make me see tribunal is not a court. We hope to take this case to ECJ if necessary. Has anyone seen who has been deported base on suspecious under eu law?

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:50 am

I guess the answer is NO, because no one here can answer this question from the first day i asked. Then i think it is pointless for the HO to say a marriage of convenience to people requesting residence card with no basic fact if no one here on a very good and big forum like this have not come across a caselaw or situation like that. Decision based on suspeciouse without a fact can they remove a family of an eea?

irene_hamm
Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Post by irene_hamm » Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:21 am

Because our solicitor did not produce most of our evidence at the first tribunal oral hearing and at the application stage, the first tribunal judge dismissed our appeal and misinterpreted the evidence with her using IS Case. Now inlight with the upper tribunal decision on this post here, the upper tribunal judge has allow our appeal for a hearing at the upper tribunal, he also stated in it using this decision of the upper tribunal regarding IS Case that there is now a guidance on how the HO should use the IS case, that they also must bring evidence to their asertion and he insist that oral hearing is unnessesary in our case that we should put in a written hearing to this case. I hope this is a sign to the HO about the way they are using IS Case. Now we will make sure our solicitor include all evidence we have, thank you to everyone that has advice me on this forum.

Locked