Significant obstacles to integration

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.
22 March 2017

Another victory to an appellant who is a citizen of Angola who appealed on human rights grounds against the decision of the Home Office of 29th December 2015 to refuse to grant him leave to remain on the basis of private life under paragraph 276 ADE. The appellant was granted leave to remain in the UK as a student until November 2002 and on 5th July 2012 made an application for leave to remain on the basis of private and family life. This application was refused on 14th October 2013 and on 6th December 2013 he applied for Judicial Review. The Court of Appeal gave him leave to withdraw the proceedings on 16th October 2015 and the Home Office agreed to withdraw the decision and reconsider the application.

The main argument was whether or not there were very significant obstacles to his integration into Angola because he spent the majority of his life in the UK. He has been diagnosed with HIV and cancer and other related illnesses and continues to receive treatment in the UK. We submitted that he left Angola at the age of seven, lived in Portugal for 24 years, came to the UK as a student and formed a relationship with a European national. His argument was that he no longer had any relatives in Angola, that his mother was in Portugal and that his European partner assisted him financially. He had residence in Portugal but only until 2002 and there was no way to extend his residency in Portugal.

Looking at the evidence in the round the Judge considered that there is likely to be non-availability of the same treatment for the appellant that he has been receiving for his conditions and he found that the current treatment adds further weight to his claim that there are very significant obstacles preventing his integration into Angola. Coupled with the fact that he left the country at the age of seven and has no members of his family living there, who could provide any accommodation or financial or emotional support. The Judge was satisfied that these problems go well beyond hardship, difficulty, hurdles, upheaval or inconvenience particularly in view of the likelihood that a break in treatment could prove fatal. The Judge found that the Home Office failed to consider all the evidence properly and the application was allowed under the Immigration Rules.