Irena Sabic KC and Eva Doerr, both of Garden Court Chambers, instructed by Bahar Ata of Duncan Lewis Solicitors, and formerly, Abdulhalim Sarker of Sarker Solicitors, acted for the Respondent, Mr Vasa.
Bojana Asanovic and David Sellwood, both of Garden Court Chambers, acted for the intervener, The AIRE Centre, led by Tom de la Mare KC of Blackstone Chambers, and instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP.
Last week, the Court of Appeal published its judgment in the case of Vasa [2024] EWCA Civ 777 concerning the scope of the ‘facilitation requirement’ in Article 10(2) of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement.
The Court confirmed that extended family members (durable partners or dependent relatives) of EEA nationals fall within the scope of the Withdrawal Agreement and are eligible for residence status under the EU Settlement Scheme, where they had been granted entry by an Immigration Officer at port and issued a stamp with the wording “Admitted to the United Kingdom under the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2016”.
The Court found that on an application under the EUSS, the Secretary of State's refusal to accept the stamps placed in Mr Vasa and Mr Hasanaj's passports as evidence of their 'facilitation of residence' breached their rights under Articles 10(2) and 18 (1) (l) (iv) of the Withdrawal Agreement. The Court upheld the Upper Tribunal's decision to allow Mr Vasa's appeal.
The judgment overturns the reported Upper Tribunal decision in Allaraj (EEA EFMs, admission, IO’s stamps) [2023] UKUT 277 and should lead the Home Office to amend and expand the definition of ‘relevant document’ in Annex I, Appendix EU.
Read the full judgment here.
See coverage: Free Movement
