Iran and the Financial Sanctions

Danielle Cohen
By Danielle Cohen Immigration Law Solicitor Linkedin
Danielle Cohen has over 20 years of experience as a lawyer and a reputation for offering professional, honest and expert advice.
15 August 2021

We have succeeded in a case in Court for an appeal which was allowed to elderly individuals from Iran.  The appeal was allowed in August 2021 and the appellants were two Iranian nationals who came to the UK as a visitors and made an application under paragraph 276ADE of the Immigration Rules.  The Home Office did not accept that there would be very significant obstacles to their integration into life in Iran and that there were  exceptional circumstances in this case.  We argued that there are very significant obstacles to them returning to Iran because they were elderly with deteriorating physical and mental health, because they were retired and living on small pensions to meet their needs and because they could not receive financial support from their children due to the economic sanctions. We demonstrated that there is no care available from the Iranian Government and they could not afford the costs of private health cover and that care homes are not affordable as an option.  We demonstrated that the children cannot visit them due to the risks to them as dual British and Iranian nationals.  We provided a lot of evidence to show that there are very significant obstacles and that included country expert report which referred to the obstacles in terms of the healthcare system in Iran, the impact of the international sanctions, the effect of Coved on the healthcare and economy of Iran and the arrest of dual nationals upon their return to Iran.  We also provided evidence in respect of the rapidly rising inflation and that there has been a recent election resulting in the coming to power of Ebrahim Raisi, who is a hard liner and suspected of recent crimes against humanity in Iran.  The Immigration judge  accepted that the public healthcare in Iran  is completely overwhelmed and that the appellants would not be able to afford treatment on a private basis and that the case was compassionate.

It concluded that the issue in this case is proportionality and in balancing the interests of the appellants and their children against the public interests the Judge found that the balance is in favour of allowing the appeal.