UI2024004700 & Ors [2025] UKAITUR UI2024004700 (27 August 2025)

UI2024004700 & Ors [2025] UKAITUR UI2024004700 (27 August 2025)

The Upper Tribunal found that the Appellants and S share real, effective, committed support constituting family life under Article 8 ECHR, due to S’s severe mental health dependency and the family’s precarious circumstances. Refusal of entry clearance would be unjustifiably harsh and disproportionate, given exhausted treatment options and absence of viable alternatives. Appeals allowed on human rights grounds.

Citation
[2025] UKAITUR UI2024004700
Parties
Appellant: AA; Appellant: BB; Appellant: CC; Appellant: DD; Appellant: EE; Appellant: FF; Appellant: GG; Respondent: Entry Clearance Office, Turkey
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
27 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Immigration Appeal / Upper Tribunal Appeal, Post FTT Decision Set Aside, Remade Decision
Outcome
appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Article 8 ECHR, Family Reunion, Mental Health, Proportionality, Dependency, Exceptional Circumstances
Immigration Human Rights Asylum Article 8 ECHR Family Reunion Mental Health Proportionality Dependency +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AA

Appellant

BB

Appellant

CC

Appellant

DD

Appellant

EE

Appellant

FF

Appellant

GG

Appellant

Entry Clearance Office, Turkey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Immigration Appeal / Upper Tribunal Appeal, Post FTT Decision Set Aside, Remade Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal of entry clearance breaches Article 8 ECHR family life rights
  2. 2 Whether 'family life' exists between adult relatives under Article 8
  3. 3 Whether refusal is disproportionate given mental health and dependency circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The Upper Tribunal found that the Appellants and S share real, effective, committed support constituting family life under Article 8 ECHR, due to S’s severe mental health dependency and the family’s precarious circumstances. Refusal of entry clearance would be unjustifiably harsh and disproportionate, given exhausted treatment options and absence of viable alternatives. Appeals allowed on human rights grounds.

Court Disposition

appeals allowed

Orders

  • Decision of First-tier Tribunal set aside
  • Appeals allowed on human rights grounds