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.
            This is an appeal by the Secretary of State. For ease of reference, I refer to the parties as they were before the First-tier Tribunal. The Respondent appeals against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Dineen promulgated on 31 May 2022 ("the Decision") allowing the Appellant's appeal against the Respondent's decision dated 1 July 2021 refusing him status under the EU Settlement Scheme ("EUSS") as the spouse of an EEA national.
            The Respondent refused the Appellant's application on the basis that his marriage was not contracted until after 31 December 2020. Accordingly, the Appellant was not a family member prior to the date of the UK's departure from the EU and could not benefit as such under either the rules relating to EUSS (Appendix EU) or the withdrawal agreement between the UK and the EU on the UK's departure from the EU ("the Withdrawal Agreement").
            Permission to appeal was granted by First-tier Tribunal Judge I D Boyes on 22 June 2022 on the basis that all grounds were "clearly arguable".
            The appeal was thereafter stayed in this Tribunal in consequences of this Tribunal's decision in Celik (EU exit; marriage; human rights) [2022] UKUT 220 (IAC) (" Celik "). The Tribunal's guidance in that case was upheld by the Court of Appeal ( [2023] EWCA Civ 921 ).
            By a consent order dated 19 June 2024, both parties agreed with that view. The consent order reads as follows:
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.