Not solely did this Appellant win her appeal in 2015 however did so for a second time in April 2022, efficiently countering the Secretary of State’s additional unproven allegations that her marriage to an EEA national was one of convenience.
The Appellant, CZ, contended that as a spouse, she had made a legitimate utility below Appendix EU of the Immigration Rules and was eligible for indefinite go away to stay as a member of the family of a related European Economic Area (EEA) citizen and happy one of the circumstances of Rule EU11 of Appendix EU.
Relevant provisions of Appendix EU:
Annex A Definitions of Appendix EU, gives the definition of civil partnership of convenience, sturdy partnership of convenience, marriage of convenience as entered into as a way to avoid:
- any criterion the social gathering must meet as a way to take pleasure in a proper to enter or reside within the UK below the EEA Regulations; or
- some other provision of UK immigration legislation or any requirement of the Immigration Rules; or
- any criterion the social gathering would in any other case have to fulfill as a way to take pleasure in a proper to enter or reside within the UK below EU legislation; or
- any criterion the social gathering must meet as a way to take pleasure in a proper to enter or reside within the Islands below Islands legislation
The definition of spouse doesn’t embrace a marriage of convenience.
What appeared to depend against the Appellant:
The odds appeared stacked against CZ:
- She disclosed throughout a marriage interview, that resulting from disagreements with the EEA sponsor, there had…
