R (T) v Secretary of State of the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Moore-Bick,Lord Justice Longmore,Lady Justice Macur |
| Judgment Date | 28 July 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] EWCA Civ 801 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | Case No: C4/2014/2634 |
| Date | 28 July 2016 |
[2016] EWCA Civ 801
Lord Justice Moore-bick
Vice-president Of The Court Of Appeal, Civil Division
Lord Justice Longmore
and
Lady Justice Macur
Case No: C4/2014/2634
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Mr. Justice Dingemans
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Miss Judith Farbey Q.C. and Miss Rebecca Chapman (instructed by Ealing Law Centre) for the appellant
Miss Cathryn McGahey Q.C. (instructed by the Government Legal Department) for the respondent
Hearing date: 12 th July 2016
Judgment Approved
This is an appeal by the appellant, T, against the order of Dingemans J. dismissing her claim for judicial review of the decision of the Secretary of State to refuse her application under what is known as the "Destitute Domestic Violence Concession" (the "DDV Concession").
The DDV Concession was established outside the Immigration Rules in April 2012 as a means of providing temporary support and assistance to destitute victims of domestic violence, who through lack of means would otherwise be forced to remain in abusive relationships. Under it a successful applicant is granted leave to remain for a period of three months, without a condition prohibiting recourse to public funds, to enable her (most applicants are inevitably women) to make an application for indefinite leave to remain under section DVILR of Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules. The Concession can therefore be viewed as a basis of granting temporary relief designed to enable a victim of domestic violence to make a substantive application for indefinite leave to remain.
Background
The background to this appeal is described by Dingemans J. in his judgment as follows:
"2. The Claimant is now the spouse of a refugee who was granted refugee status on 16 November 2007 with 5 years' leave to remain. The refugee left the United Kingdom in 2010 and travelled to Ethiopia where he met and married the Claimant. The Claimant then applied to enter the United Kingdom. On 16 July 2012 the Claimant was granted entry clearance to the United Kingdom as the post flight spouse of a refugee, and the Claimant was granted leave to enter on 10 August 2012.
3. On 31 December 2012 the refugee, now the Claimant's husband, applied for indefinite leave to remain ("ILR"). He was granted ILR on 6 February 2013. In circumstances, the details of which it is not necessary to relate, the Claimant became the victim of unlawful domestic and sexual violence. This is common ground for the purposes of this case….
4. On 19 February 2013 the Claimant was accommodated in an emergency night shelter and on 26 February 2013 she made an application under a policy operated by the Defendant known as the Destitute Domestic Violence Concession ("the DDV Concession"). This application was refused on the same day on the basis that it was said that the DDV Concession did not apply to the Claimant.
5. On 25 April 2013 a further application was made under the DDV Concession. By letter dated 30 April 2013 the Defendant refused the application stating that
"you arrived in the United Kingdom on 10 August 2012 with entry clearance post flight spouse of a person who holds limited leave in the United Kingdom as a refugee/HP beneficiary, you were granted leave in line with your EC until 16 October 2017. Consequently, you do not qualify for temporary leave under the Concession as you were not admitted to the United Kingdom as a spouse, civil partner, unmarried or same sex partner of a British citizen or someone present and settled in the United Kingdom under part 8 (or appendix FM) of the Immigration Rules"." (Emphasis added.)
On 28 th May 2013 the claimant began proceedings seeking judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision. A large number of issues were originally raised in the proceedings, but by the time the matter came on for trial it was common ground that the case turned on the correct interpretation of sections DVILR and E-DVILR of Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules, which deal with applications for indefinite leave to remain by foreign victims of domestic violence. It was accepted that it was not unlawful for the Secretary of State to refuse temporary relief to someone who could not satisfy the requirements for a grant of indefinite leave to remain.
Sections DVILR and E-DVILR of Appendix FM
At the time in question sections DVILR and E-DVILR provided as follows:
" Section DVILR: Indefinite leave to remain (settlement) as a victim of domestic violence.
DVILR 1.1. The requirements to be met for indefinite leave to remain in the UK as a victim of domestic violence are that—
(a) the applicant must be in the UK;
(b) the applicant must have made a valid application for indefinite leave to remain as a victim of domestic violence;
(c) the applicant must not fall for refusal under any of the grounds in Section S-ILR: Suitability-indefinite leave to remain; and
(d) the applicant must meet all of the requirements of Section E-DVILR: Eligibility for indefinite leave to remain as a victim of domestic violence.
Section E-DVILR: Eligibility for indefinite leave to remain as a victim of domestic violence
E-DVILR 1.1. To meet the eligibility requirements for indefinite leave to remain as a victim of domestic violence all of the requirements of paragraphs E-DVILR.1.2. and 1.3. must be met.
E-DVILR 1.2. The applicant's last grant of limited leave must have been –
(a) as a partner (other than fiancé(e) or proposed civil partner) of a British Citizen or a person settled in the UK;
(b) granted to enable access to public...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R (on the application of SWP) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...with the way in which the rationale for the DDVC was understood by this Court in R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 801, where Moore-Bick LJ said, at para. 2: “The DDV Concession was established outside the Immigration Rules in April 2012 as a means of provi......
-
The Queen (on the application of FA (Sudan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...its terms.” 17 The background to the Concession was described by Moore-Bick LJ in R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 801, at para. 2, as follows: “The DDV Concession was established outside the Immigration Rules in April 2012 as a means of providing temporar......
-
The Queen (on the Application of FA (Sudan)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
...that more is required. FA must satisfy all of the conditions set out at [14] above. In this regard, see the case of R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 801, where at [ 11] Moore-Bick LJ held as follows: “In my view when considering an application under the DD......