BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments >> UI2023004525 [2023] UKAITUR UI2023004525 (24 December 2023) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2023/UI2023004525.html Cite as: [2023] UKAITUR UI2023004525 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER |
| ||
|
|
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Decision & Reasons Issued:
On 24 December 2023
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE SHERIDAN
Between
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Appellant
and
NATALIE GHERSI
(NO ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Mr E Terrell, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
For the Respondent: Ms A Delbourgo, Counsel instructed by Hamilton Rees Solicitors
Heard at Field House on 20 November 2023
DECISION AND REASONS
1. The Secretary of State is appealing against a decision of Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Mill, dated 7 September 2023, allowing an appeal by the respondent under the Immigration (Citizens' Rights Appeals) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020.
2. The central issue in contention before the First-tier Tribunal was whether the respondent was entitled to leave under the EUSS on the basis that she had been residing in the UK for a continuous qualifying period before the specified date of 31 December 2020.
3. At the start of the hearing, Mr Terrell conceded the appeal. He accepted that the respondent satisfied the necessary conditions under Appendix EU. With respect to whether the continuous qualifying period requirement had been met, which was the issue that had been in contention, Mr Terrell conceded that it had by operation of subparagraph (c)(ii)(aa) of the definition of continuous qualifying period in Annex 1. Mr Terrell accepted that, in the light of this, the decision of the First-tier Tribunal should not be set aside.
Notice of decision
4. In the light of the Secretary of State's concession, the decision of the First-tier Tribunal stands.
D. Sheridan
Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber
19 December 2023