Photo by reporterLONDON: The Supreme Court gave its verdict in favour of a Pakistani national, ruling that he should be entitled to reside in the United Kingdom on account of being the primary carer for his young son.33-year-old Adil Shah has been embroiled in a six-year legal battle with the Home Office, after his application for the right to reside in the UK (for the sake of his British national son) was refused.The Pakistani national, while expressing his feelings, said that he is 'relieved that at last justice has prevailed'.He said that as he looks after his son, while his wife — who is also a British citizen — works full-time, his son will also be forced to leave the UK if he gets deported.In December 2017, the Court of Appeal found that Shah's wife, Sanya Ahmed, would be able to look after their son.But in a unanimous ruling delivered on Monday, the Supreme Court upheld Shah's appeal, finding that his son "would be compelled to leave with his father" if he was deported.In a statement after the ruling, Shah said he was "happy and relieved" at the decision, having "gone through so many stressful and hard times" over the last six years.Shah's solicitor, Mohammad Islam Khan, of Lincolns Solicitors, said: "Today's ruling is a welcome precedent for similar cases in the future, and paves the way for a very humane, fair approach in decision-making where British children are involved."Civil rights group Liberty, which intervened in the case, welcomed the ruling as "a victory for children's rights to stay with their parents".Lara ten Caten, a lawyer with the group, said: "The Home Office's attempt to deport a father and primary carer was not only cruel, it was counter-productive."The Supreme Court decision hopefully means the Home Office will not try to separate families in this way ever again."Mohammad Islam Khan told that his client is a Pakistani national whose wife and child are British nationals. He explained: "He is the primary carer for his child, while his wife works full time. In March 2014, the Home Office rejected his application for a derivative residence card. The Home Office argued that if he was removed from the UK his child would not be compelled to leave because the child can remain in the UK with his mother. “Alternatively, the Home Office said that Shah’s wife and child could choose to follow him to Pakistan if they wanted to remain together," he continued.The First-tier Tribunal upheldShah’s appeal against the Home Office’s decision. The Home Office appealed this to the Upper Tribunal. Both tribunals found that if Shah is removed his wife would be unable to support the child without accessing public funds, she would follow him to Pakistan and the child would be compelled to leave as well.The Home Office appealed this to the Court of Appeal, which allowed the Home Office’s appeal in December 2017.
Post a Comment