Coronavirus - Business Continuity Coronavirus - Law & Practice

Upper Tribunal rules Home Office interpreted guidance on settlement illegitimately

Monday 22 March 2021

Peter Jorro of the Garden Court Chambers Immigration Team represented the appellant, instructed by Jessica Wong of Brion & Co. 

Share This Page

Email This Page

Peter Jorro represented as counsel, instructed by Jessica Wong of Brion & Co, the appellant in a case where she had been refused settlement owing to having been absent from the UK for 543 days in the past 10 years. Relevant immigration rule 276A(v) allows for 18 months' total absence and the Home Office guidance asserts this amount to a total of 540 days.

With reference to the Supreme Court and many other authorities, Peter successfully argued in grounds, and written submissions, before the Upper Tribunal that the Home Office guidance illegitimately interpreted 18 months to mean only 540 days, and that as 18 months could constitute up to 548 days, the benefit must go to the applicant. Clearly this is a case of potential benefit to other applicants.

Please see the judgment here

Related Areas of Law

Latest tweets from Garden Court Chambers

Follow us on Twitter

Tweets by Garden Court Chambers

We are top ranked by independent legal directories and consistently win awards.

+ View more awards