Successful Adult Dependent Relative appeal
Ruslan Kosarenko, Oksana Demyanchuk and Michael Carter, along with our talented team of legal associates, achieved a favourable result on behalf of our client (hereinafter referred to as “the Appellant”). The Appellant’s son and daughter-in-law wished to have the Appellant brought to live with them in the UK as their Adult Dependant Relative (ADR) owing to her rapidly deteriorating physical and mental health following her late husband’s demise, which was exacerbated by the forced social isolation that the Appellant experienced during the Covid-19 pandemic. The matter progressed to an appeal hearing after an initial rejection and was ultimately successful for the Appellant.
Background to the case
This case involved a 76 year old citizen of Israel (the Appellant), whose son and daughter-in-law are British citizens living and working in the UK. The Appellant lost her husband a few years ago and has, ever since, experienced a deterioration in the condition of her physical and mental health. The Covid-19 pandemic further worsened her condition, resulting in the Appellant being diagnosed with dementia. The Appellant’s daughter lives in a different country following an estrangement with her mother and consequently, the Appellant had no family member left in Israel to provide her with the everyday care that she needed. In the absence of such facilities, private care was unaffordable, and it was not possible for the Appellant’s son to move to Israel to care for his mother. An application to qualify as her son and daughter-in-law’s Adult Dependant Relative was therefore made on behalf of the Appellant, which was refused on the grounds of not fulfilling the criteria set out under Immigration Rules ECDR.2.4-E-ECDR.2.5. Accordingly, an appeal was filed under Section 82 of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act, 2002 (NIAA)
The Appeal hearing before the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
Ms. Julian Norman presented oral submissions before Judge Leighton Hughes of the First-tier Tribunal who allowed the appeal. The Judge, while allowing the application, accepted the Appellant’s submissions that the Entry Clearance Officer had erred in refusing the Appellant’s application by taking a myopic view of the medical report provided by her doctor in Israel, and had refused to take into consideration the impact of the Appellant’s deteriorating mental health on her ability to perform everyday activities. The Judge also accepted that there were no alternative care options for the Appellants in Israel, and that her son and his family cannot be reasonably expected to move to Israel to care for her.
How we assisted our client (the Appellant)
We ensured that the arguments we had raised in the initial application were substantiated by detailed documentary evidence and credible witness testimony, which were crucial in developing our arguments.
We provided detailed witness statements from the Appellant’s son and daughter-in-law who were familiar with the Appellant’s situation and mental health issues and were able to express the realities of the Appellant’s everyday struggles in Israel. Through their testimony, we were also able to demonstrate the importance of familial ties and bring to the Court’s attention that since it was her husband’s death that brought about the onslaught of her mental health issues, further removal and isolation of the Appellant from her family by admitting her in a private care facility (even if it were affordable to do so) would not help her in the slightest. We also provided a detailed medical report that established the Appellant’s diagnosis of dementia, which was relied upon by the Judge in reaching his conclusion.
This case turned on what it means to be “functionally independent,” to be considered successful in fulfilling the stipulations laid down under the NIAA. The Judge correlated the importance of mental health with the ability of a person to perform day to day tasks successfully and without assistance, and the likely mental additional distress resulting from the inability to do so, especially with no access to close family.
All’s well that ends well for our client, the Appellant in the matter, who will now hopefully be granted the Adult Dependant Relative visa without any further complications.
