Benefits of a UK Immigration/Visa Appeal:

  • Increases the chances of the visa being granted
  • Is often cheaper than making a brand new application
  • You have the chance to explain your case to a judge in person
  • You will be referred to and represented by an experienced barrister and solicitor who will prepare your process of appeal and defend your case.


Time Limits for visa appeals:

It is very important that all appeals are lodged in time to the AIT. The time limits differ according to the circumstances of your visa appeal:

Out of Country Refusal – 28 Days

Appeal to Upper Tribunal – 5 days after refusal from FTT

Imperial Visas is regulated at the highest level of OISC (Level 3) and we can make:

  • Applications to the Home Office, including human rights applications and concessionary or discretionary applications
  • Applications for Humanitarian Protection
  • Representing clients in correspondence with the Home Office and at Home Office interviews
  • Representations to the Home Office in support of visa appeal cases
  • Drafting client statements, including asylum statements
  • Submitting One-Stop Notices
  • Lodging notices of visa appeal and statements of additional grounds
  • Applications for temporary admission and Chief Immigration Officers bail
  • Representations regarding on-going immigration casework to MPs
  • Instruct a barrister or advocate for advice and to advise on drafting appropriate grounds of appeal, and submitting appeals to the Tribunal (and also instruct them to appear in the court if needed)


Appeals Under Article 8 of ECHR: Right of Private & Family life

The European Convention on Human Rights deals with a number of basic rights that are guaranteed to every individual irrespective of their religion, race, nationality or membership of a particular social group, who resides within the boundaries of the countries belonging to the Council of Europe

The lists of fundamental human rights are enshrined in separate Articles of section 1 while other sections deal with the establishment of European Court of Human Rights and miscellaneous provisions.

Article 8 deals with the right of private and family life of every person living within the premises of Europe and is more relevant in relation to the Immigration decisions taken by the public authorities of the member states.

A.    What does Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights state?

1.    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2.    There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

B.    Who can claim right to live / remain in a member state on the basis of establishment of right of private & family life?

Any person, who has established his private and family life successfully in the UK and can provide evidence to that effect, can claim right to remain in the UK. The person can be:

1.    An over stayer

2.    Illegal entrant

3.    Failed asylum seeker

4.    Anyone having no claim under the Immigration rules or EEA regulations to live and remain here in the UK.

C.    Criteria for assessing a valid claim under Article 8

A family life can be established in the following relationships:

1.    Close family relations

Husband / wife or Civil Partnerships

Unmarried and Same sex Partners (there is no requirement for them to have at least 2 years of relationship as they are required to do so to qualify under the Immigration rules).

Parent / Child / Adopted Child

2.    Wider Family relations

Grandparents/ Grandchildren

Uncles / Aunts

Nephews / Nieces

Adult Siblings

Parents / Adult Children

Foster Families

The Home office normally uses a five-step criteria in order to assess whether the applicant has established his Private or family life in the UK.

If the applicant can address the above-mentioned issues separately by providing directly or indirectly relevant documentary evidences in his support and that makes his case “truly exceptional”, only then he may be granted leave to remain in the UK.

        Has the applicant established family or private life in the UK 

       Will visa refusal / removal interfere with that family life – are there insurmountable obstacles to the family enjoying      family life elsewhere

       If there is interference with family life, is it in accordance with the law

       Is the interference in pursuit of one of the permissible aims set out under Article 8(2)

      Is the interference proportionate to the permissible aim 


There are some factors that may be taken into account in assessing “truly exceptional” circumstances of an    individual.

Some of them are:

Applicant`s ties with his country of origin

Family members` ties with the UK

Are there any health or other welfare issues involved?

Availability of entry clearance facilities in the country of origin

Has there been a delay in determining an earlier immigration application?

Would there be any effects on the family living in the UK of the removal of the applicant?

Nature of relationship

Are there any minor children in the relationship?

Frequency of contact with the relatives 

Is there any dependency involved in the relationship?

Applicant`s and his family members` countries of nationality & immigration status.

The list is not exhaustive and some other factors that may be considered as relevant in some appeals can be totally irrelevant in other visa appeals. The threshold is however very high and difficult to achieve unless there are genuinely “truly and exceptional” circumstances existing.

The House of Lords has set an example of such cases in a starred case it was held that:

“In order to rely upon a foreign breach of ECHR articles other than Article 3, a claimant would have to show that he would risk suffering a “flagrant denial or gross violation” of such rights in the receiving state”.

D.   Conclusion

On the face of it, Article 8 may appear to be another reason to stay in the UK on the basis of establishment of private and family life in the UK, but in fact it is only in “truly and exceptional” cases that applicants are permitted to remain in the country.

E.    Current Position on Human Rights:

               The current stage in 2014 the following are demed authorituies of cases:

The maintenance requirements of E-LTRP.3.1-3.2 stand, although Blake J in R (on the application of MM)  v Secretary of State for the Home Department said that they could constitute an unjustified and disproportionate interference with the ability of spouses to live together; he suggested that an appropriate figure may be around £13,400, and highlighted the position of young people and low wage earners caught by the higher figure in the rules;

(b)    after applying the requirements of the Rules, only if there may be arguably good grounds for granting leave to remain outside them is it necessary for Article 8 purposes to go on to consider whether there are compelling circumstances not sufficiently recognised under them: R (on the application of) Nagre v Secretary of State for the Home Department;

(c)    the term “insurmountable obstacles” in provisions such as Section EX.1 are not obstacles which are impossible to surmount: MF (Article 8 – new rules) Nigeria ; Izuazu (Article 8 – new rules) ; they concern the practical possibilities of relocation. In the absence of such insurmountable obstacles, it is necessary to show other non-standard and particular features demonstrating that removal will be unjustifiably harsh: Nagre.

The Secretary of State addressed the Article 8 family aspects of the respondent’s position through the Rules, in particular EX1, and the private life aspects through paragraph 276ADE. The judge should have done likewise, also paying attention to the Guidance. Thus the judge should have considered the Secretary of State’s conclusion under EX.1 that there were no insurmountable obstacles preventing the continuation of the family life outside the UK. Only if there were arguably good grounds for granting leave to remain outside the rules was it necessary for him for Article 8 purposes to go on to consider whether there were compelling circumstances not sufficiently recognised under the Rules.

Error: Contact form not found.