New Video - Upper Tribunal (IAC) Reported Decisions: April 2020
In this series I summarise the reported decisions of the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber for 2020 tackling them a month at a time. In this video I look at the reported decisions for April 2020 on dependency for extended family members and the definition of a foreign criminal. The citations and links are below. I will put a copy of my slides on the No8 Chambers’ website.
Chowdhury (Extended family members: dependency) [2020] UKUT 188 (IAC) (29 April 2020)
The words "and continues to be dependent" in regulation 8(2)(c) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulation 2006, properly characterised, require an applicant to establish that there has not been a break in their dependency on the EEA national sponsor.
1. Paragraph A398 of the immigration rules governs each of the rules in Part 14 that follows it. The expression 'foreign criminal' in paragraph A398 is to be construed by reference to the definition of that expression in section 117D of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002: OLO and Others (para 398 - 'foreign criminal') [2016] UKUT 56 affirmed; Andell (foreign criminal - para 398) [2018] UKUT 198 not followed.
2. A foreign national who has been convicted outside the United Kingdom of an offence is not, by reason of that conviction, a 'foreign criminal' for the purposes of paragraphs A398-399D of the rules.
3. In the absence of a material change in circumstances or prior misleading of the Tribunal, it will be a very rare case in which the important considerations of finality and proper use of the appeals procedure are displaced in favour of revisiting and varying or revoking an interlocutory order: Gardner-Shaw (UK) Ltd v HMRC [2018] UKUT 419 followed.