Farooq, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (meaning of permission to stay)
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
The case concerns the interpretation of the phrase “permission to stay” in immigration law.
What happened
The applicant, Sheikh Hammad Farooq, a Pakistani citizen, entered the UK illegally in 2003. He was convicted in 2006 for obtaining services by deception and using a false instrument, receiving a 12-month custodial sentence. Despite accruing 10 years of continuous lawful residence, his application for indefinite leave to remain was refused due to the criminality bar in the Immigration Rules.
What the court decided
The Tribunal held that "permission to stay" has the same meaning as "leave to remain" under the Immigration Act 1971, and is a unitary concept encompassing both temporary (limited) leave and permanent leave, including indefinite leave to remain / settlement. Consequently the criminality ground for refusal in paragraph 9.4.1 of Part 9 of the Immigration Rules applies to settlement applications made under Appendix Long Residence. Applying that construction, the Secretary of State had lawfully refused the applicant's indefinite-leave (long residence) application on the basis of his 2006 conviction and 12-month custodial sentence.
How the court got there
The court decided that 'permission to stay' has the same meaning as 'leave to remain' under the Immigration Act 1971, covering both temporary and permanent leave. The criminality ground for refusal applied to the applicant's settlement application due to his past conviction, justifying the Secretary of State's refusal.
Categories
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.