UI2023004547

            The appeal was next listed to come before me on 6 November 2024. However, prior to the hearing, the Respondent sought a further adjournment which was not opposed in order that both parties could comply with the filing and service of position statements as directed and would have the opportunity to consider each other's position.

            I had before me a bundle running to 665 pages (pdf) containing the documents relevant to the error of law, and the Appellant's and Respondent's bundles before the First-tier Tribunal. I refer to those documents as [B/xx]. I also had an agreed bundle of authorities and position statements dated 11 November 2024 (from the Respondent) and 24 November 2024 (from the Appellant). I also had skeleton arguments from the Appellant dated 9 February 2024 and 1 May 2024 and from the Respondent dated 17 April 2024.

            Having heard submissions from Mr Deller and Mr Claire, I indicated that I would reserve my decision and provide that with reasons in writing which I now turn to do.

            In light of the agreement that the error of law decision will determine the outcome of this appeal, it is more appropriate that my consideration of the issues focus on the legal position rather than the reasoning of the previous Judge, not least because I had the benefit of more detailed submissions from the Respondent in relation to the law.

            Briefly, though, the appeal before Judge Aldridge focussed on the Appellant's case that he is entitled to status under the EUSS on the basis that he is the "Zambrano" carer of two Irish children, his stepchildren Jemma and Rocco. He accepts that he is unable to meet the Immigration Rules which apply ("Appendix EU"). The focus of his case is therefore on the terms of the agreement between the UK and EU on the UK's departure from the EU ("the Withdrawal Agreement").