Upper Tribunal upholds Home Office decision that visitor intended to reside in UK through “frequent and successive visits”

The Upper Tribunal has refused a judicial review challenging a decision to refuse the applicant leave to enter as a visitor and to set directions for her removal from the UK. The case is R (Ezeh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department JR-2024-LON-001069.

The applicant had previously been granted entry clearance as a visitor and had entered the UK 20 times between January 2023 and April 2024. She had applied for a Health and Care skilled worker visa which was refused in August 2023 and the proposed sponsor lost its licence later that year.

The applicant’s two children were attending boarding school in the UK. On 13 April 2024 the applicant was granted bail at the border in order to take her children to school. She was then interviewed by an immigration officer on 16 April 2024 and refused permission to enter.

The Home Office concluded that the applicant was seeking to reside in the UK “through frequent and successive visits” and was not a genuine visitor. This was in light of the amount of time she had spent in the UK, which was already 64 days at the date of the decision with her return ticket booked for July 2024, along with other factors such as her purchase of a property in the UK in 2023. Removal directions were given but then lifted after the judicial review application was lodged.

The judicial review was refused, the Upper Tribunal dismissing claims that the decision was a breach of the applicant’s article 8 rights or that there had been a failure to consider all relevant matters.