Genuine and Subsisting Relationship Case Study

Background

Mr. X, a British citizen, had married Ms. Y, a non-British national, who had a young child, Z, from a previous relationship. Mr. X had formed a close relationship with Z and had assumed a parental role towards her. In 2020, Ms. Y applied for a family visa for herself and Z to join Mr. X in the UK. However, the Home Office refused the application, arguing that Mr. X did not have a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with Z.

Legal Issues

Black Antelope Law was instructed to appeal the Home Office's decision on behalf of Mr. X, arguing that the refusal was incorrect and unjustified. The central issue in the appeal was whether Mr. X had a genuine and subsisting relationship with Z, which is a requirement under the UK's immigration rules for a step-parent to sponsor their step-child for a family visa. Black Antelope Law had to show that Mr. X had assumed a parental role towards Z and that their relationship was not merely superficial or transactional.

Legal Strategy

Black Antelope Law prepared a strong appeal case, supported by detailed witness statements from Mr. X and other family members, as well as evidence of the family's ties to the UK and their intentions to settle in the country. Black Antelope Law also relied on relevant case law, such as Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rahman [2012] EWCA Civ 1199, which established that a step-parent's relationship with their step-child must be genuine and not merely tokenistic or contrived.

Outcome

The First-tier Tribunal heard the appeal and agreed with Black Antelope Law's arguments, finding that Mr. X had a genuine and subsisting relationship with Z. The Tribunal noted the evidence of Mr. X's involvement in Z's upbringing, including attending school meetings, helping with homework, and participating in family activities. The Tribunal also considered the family's ties to the UK, including Mr. X's employment and their social and community connections. The appeal was allowed, and Ms. Y and Z were granted family visas to join Mr. X in the UK.       

Implications

This case highlights the importance of providing detailed evidence and documentation to support family visa applications, especially in cases involving step-parents and step-children. It also demonstrates the value of seeking legal advice and representation to challenge decisions by the Home Office that are incorrect or unjustified. By working with Black Antelope Law, Mr. X was able to successfully appeal the refusal of his family's visa application and secure their right to live together in the UK.