Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
      For the sake of continuity I shall refer to the parties as they were before the First-tier Tribunal. Therefore, the Secretary of State is once more "the Respondent" and Mr Al Dulaimi is "the Appellant".
      The Respondent appeals with permission against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Chamberlain ("the Judge"), promulgated on 5 October 2022 following a hearing conducted on 13 September 2022. By that decision, the Judge allowed the Appellant's appeal against the Respondent's refusal of his application under the EU Settlement Scheme ("EUSS") as set out in Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules.
      The Judge then set out the history of the couple's relationship which had begun with introductions in the summer of 2018 and led to culturally appropriate communications and then the consideration of marriage. Subsequently, the Appellant began providing financial support to the Sponsor. In April 2019, the couple met in the Netherlands. A firm intention to marry was formed in 2020, but these were put on hold due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
      In light of the foregoing, the Judge found that whilst there was no evidence of cohabitation there was significant other evidence of a durable relationship which existed as at 31 December 2020. The Judge also found that that relationship continued to date. Given that that was the sole issue before her, the Judge concluded that the definition of durable partner under Annex 1 to Appendix EU had been satisfied and that the appeal should accordingly be allowed under the 2020 Regulations.
      The Respondent's grounds of appeal were narrowly drawn. It was stated in clear terms that the challenge was predicated upon alleged irrationality on the Judge's part. In light of the absence of evidence of cohabitation, it was said that the Judge acted irrationally in concluding that there was a durable relationship between the Appellant and the Sponsor. The Judge had, it was said, "conflated" the issue of whether the relationship was subsisting with whether it was durable.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.