Extended family member’s appeal rights confirmed by a recent Court of Appeal case
The Court of Appeal dealt with the potential limitations to rights of a durable partner of EU citizens in the case of Secretary of State for the Home Department v Christy [2018] EWCA Civ 2378.
Background
The respondent, Ms Christy, is a US national who established what in EU law parlance is called a “durable relationship” with a UK national, Mr Jones, while they were both living in Poland. Mr Jones exercised his treaty rights by working in a school while Ms Christry had a right of residence under Poland’s domestic immigration rules and further had no need to seek to rely on any rights she might have as the durable partner of an EU citizen.
The main issue on this appeal relates to the conditions under which such a right of facilitation arises. Ms Christy claims that in the circumstances of the present case such a right of facilitation has arisen for her benefit, which the Secretary of State has failed to honour. The appellant Secretary of State contends that no such right of facilitation has arisen. Therefore, it was argued that they did not have to consider her application in this way.
Conclusion
Further to the case of Banger (Unmarried Partner of British National) [2017] UKUT 125 (IAC), the case of Christy confirms Surinder Singh’s applicability to extended family members. In ChristyHome office made an attempt to circumvent Surinder Singh’s applicability on extended family members in the hope of getting around the decision of O and B v Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel ; [2014] QB 1163 (“O and B”) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Banger, (“Banger”).
Upon analysing EU law and relevant judgments, Lord Justice Sales did not allow Home Office’s arguments to stand. This means the decision of Banger still stands, and it is correct to say that EFM’s are entitled to a right of appeal.
Home Office is yet to incorporate the Judgement of Banger in its policy guidance
Disclaimer:
The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position. Connaught Law and authors accept no responsibility for loss which may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog. For formal advice on the current law please don’t hesitate to contact Connaught Law. Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Connaught Law.
About the Author
