In TZ (Pakistan) and PG (India) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1109 (17 May 2018) the Court of Appeal gave guidance in relation to Article 8 and the Immigration Rules in the context of relationships formed with a British citizen at a time when a person’s immigration status is precarious. At §34 the court confirmed that if the Immigration Rules are met then this is positively determinative of an Article 8 appeal:
That leaves the question of whether the tribunal is required to make a decision on article 8 requirements within the Rules i.e. whether there are insurmountable obstacles, before or in order to make a decision about article 8 outside the Rules. The policy of the Secretary of State as expressed in the Rules is not to be ignored when a decision about article 8 is to be made outside the Rules. An evaluation of the question whether there are insurmountable obstacles is a relevant factor because considerable weight is to be placed on the Secretary of State's policy as reflected in the Rules of the circumstances in which a foreign national partner should be granted leave to remain. Accordingly, the tribunal should undertake an evaluation of the insurmountable obstacles test within the Rules in order to inform an evaluation outside the Rules because that formulates the strength of the public policy in immigration control 'in the case before it', which is what the Supreme Court in Hesham Ali (at [50]) held was to be taken into account. That has the benefit that where a person satisfies the Rules, whether or not by reference to an article 8 informed requirement, then this will be positively determinative of that person's article 8 appeal, provided their case engages article 8(1), for the very reason that it would then be disproportionate for that person to be removed.
See also §28 for the ongoing relevance of Chikwamba and EB (Kosovo) in the assessment of Article 8 outside of the rules.