Tag: Settlement

Out of Time Appeal Resulted in Settlement Decision for Our Client

Sterling Law encountered a young professional who valiantly fought against the incompetent bureaucracy of the Home Office. Eventually we managed to resolve our client’s case by achieving settlement status, however, she remained in legal limbo for 4 years and had to go through the countless red tape to continue her future in her adoptive country.

A Georgian national came to the UK on her student visa when she was only nineteen years old. On subsequent occasions she was granted leave to remain as a student. In 2014, she sought to progress her further education with a Master’s degree in the UK. Unfortunately, her application was refused. She was, therefore, put at risk of losing her status in the UK, jeopardising her future dreams and aspirations, and depriving her of the right to complete her education, which she had paid for. This was contrary to the principle of fairness under the common law.

The Home Office explained the refusal by failure to meet the financial visa requirements, which in fact, was not the case.

Our client erroneously did not credit the relevant bank account in time to demonstrate she has had enough funds. Despite her previous visa history, that clearly indicated client’s ability to support herself financially, Home Office refused her application instead of requesting further documents. The client requested reconsideration, which resulted into further refusal and notification to leave the country.

She then realised the need to seek a legal advice. Sterling Law managed to achieve an out of time appeal, meaning that she can stay in the country while her case was being resolved. The exceptional grounds for the out of time appeal was drafted by Sterling Law team including Managing Partner Ruslan Kosarenko, Principal Solicitor Navdeep Kaur Gill, Associate Nozima Rakhimjonova and Immigration lawyer Josephine Smith who fought vigorously and never lost faith in the client’s matter along the process.

Settlement Granted by Upper Tribunal

The case nevertheless had a very successful ending, due to the outstanding and committed effort of the Sterling Law team.

Our client described the final verdict of the Upper Tribunal as very overwhelming sensation as she had finally obtained her indefinite leave to remain in the country.

Legal Assistance

For expert advice and assistance in relation to your particular case and relevant immigration law requirements, please contact our immigration lawyers on tel. +44(0) 20 7822 8535, mobile: 07305848477 or by e-mail: contact@sterling-law.co.uk or via our online appointment booking form.

Long Residence Appeal successful in the Upper Tribunal

Oksana Demyanchuk and the team were recently successful in a long residence appeal case in the Upper Tribunal.

The client had applied for Indefinite Leave to Remain on the basis of Long Residence. The application was subsequently refused by the Home Office due to excessive absences. An appeal was lodged against the decision by Sterling Law.

The Judge of the First-tier Tribunal noted that an abundance of evidence had been provided by the Appellant in support of his appeal.

Long Residence & Absences

Based on the evidence submitted in support of the appeal, it was accepted by the Judge that, while the Appellant had in fact exceeded the permissible number of days absent, there was a reasonable explanation for many of the absences and, as such, the Home Office was wrong not to exercise discretion in favour of the Appellant. The Judge found that

the Respondent’s decision fails to provide any insight whatsoever as to what factors, if any, the Respondent took into account in concluding that there were no “compelling or compassionate circumstance” arising in this case to warrant the exercise of her discretion in relation to the assessment under para 276B or 276 (1) ADE

The Judge then went on to assess Article 8 ECHR and allowed the appeal, being satisfied by the evidence provided, that the Appellant had built an extensive family and private life in his time in the UK and that it would be disproportionate to remove the Appellant from the UK. Accordingly, the Judge of the First-tier Tribunal allowed the appeal on human rights grounds.

The Home Office then sought permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal and was granted permission on the basis that it was arguable that the Judge’s assessment proportionality in respect of Article 8 was flawed.

The Upper Tribunal went on find that the First-tier Judge has directed herself appropriately and made appropriate findings. The Tribunal found that there had been no material error of law made by the First-tier Judge and that, therefore, the decision allowing the Appellant’s appeal based on Article 8 should stand.

Should you have any further questions, or think any of the above may apply to your matter, please do not hesitate to contact us directly:

Oksana Demyanchuk

Email: oksana@sterling-law.co.uk

Tel. 020 7822 8535


Michael Carter

Email: michael@sterling-law.co.uk

Tel. 020 7822 8535



Immigration Assistance

For expert advice and assistance in relation to your particular immigration case, please contact our immigration lawyers on Tel. +44(0)20 7822 8535, Mobile / Viber: +447463382838, or via our online appointment booking form.