Gayle v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017]

Immigration – Indefinite leave to remain – an application for indefinite leave to remain, rather than for the usual 30 months given under the leave outside the Rules policy – whether there were “particularly exceptional or compelling reasons” to grant ILR under the policy involved considering whether there was sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the individual circumstances are not just unusual but can be distinguished to a high degree from other cases necessitating deviation from the usual grant of a further 30 months – it was wrong to treat the long-standing nature of mental health issues as signifying that they will not be alleviated if immigration status is secured – it was wrong to judge the reaction of an individual with mental health problems by the standards of how an ordinary individual might react in a particular situation – it was illogical to refuse an application on the basis that a person had previously refused professional help, if the reasons for so doing would themselves be addressed by a more secure immigration status – the reasoning in Alladin did not apply where non-generic reasons were relied upon for exemption from a general policy position, and it could not be presumed that a general policy of taking a staged approach to the grant of leave before indefinite leave to remain was finally granted would necessarily trump cogent expert evidence (HHJ Wall QC sitting as a Deputy High Court judge)


Citation: Gayle, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 3385 (Admin)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s