UI2022004986

              The appellant is appealing against a decision of Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Buckwell promulgated on 26 May 2022 dismissing his appeal against a refusal of his application for leave under the EU Settlement Scheme.

              There are two grounds of appeal. Ground 1 submits that the judge was mistaken to find that the absence of a relevant document meant that the requirements of Appendix EU were not satisfied. Relying on subparagraph (b)(ii)(bb)(aaa) of the definition of a durable partner in Appendix EU, the appellant argues that there was no need for him to have a relevant document despite not otherwise having a lawful basis to stay in the UK. Ground 2 argues that the judge's Article 8 assessment was inadequate.

              The respondent submitted a detailed Rule 24 response arguing, in summary, that:

(a)            the effect of subparagraph (b)(ii)(bb)(aaa) is that a person who had another lawful basis to be in the UK on 31 December 2020 does not need to have had (or to have applied for) a relevant document before 31 December 2020 but a person, such as the appellant, who did not otherwise have a lawful basis to stay in the UK, does; and

(b)           any error in the Article 8 assessment is immaterial because the judge did not have jurisdiction to consider Article 8 This is because Article 8 is a new matter requiring the consent of the respondent to be considered, in accordance with Regulation 9(5) of the Immigration (Citizens' Rights) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, and no such consent was given in this case.