85 year old Ratna Garg from India, has finally won the right to live with her son and family in the UK, legally and permanently, after 2 years of struggle.
After winning the judicial review last year, the family awaited an appeal to be heard on 21 May 2018 at the Court of Appeal. The final decision was communicated on 28th June with a permission of a further appeal from the Home Office. While the family waited with bated breath, the Home Office did not further take the case to higher courts, but issued her the 'Residence Permit' as her Oxford based, British son, Shashi Garg's dependent.
Speaking to Asian Voice, a jubilant Shashi told us, “The news was a sigh of relief that the fight against unjust decision making of Home Office was over. I was never in doubt that I will win the case and keep my mother here with me.
“My mother had a sigh of relief when the news was communicated to her, even though she does not concern herself with the details or procedures of legal matters. The family as a whole was really happy to learn that she will now be safe with me. When the news was announced on our family group on WhatsApp, the day was filled with messages and calls for congratulations from India and other countries where extended family members live. They were really happy for her that she would now be able to possibly visit India and see her near and dear ones.
“This also means that she can now proceed to get her treatment (she requires a hip replacement). It was put on hold as she could not travel out of UK until the outcome of this case and nor she would get treatment under NHS as she was a visitor. Hip replacement will help make her physical life better as she is likely to be more mobile.
“As a whole the decision has upheld trust in logic and that humanity and family life is above all laws.”
In the final judgement that the Asian Voice saw, the judge said, “I have found that the Appellant (Ratna) is wholly dependent upon her son. I have found that there is no realistic or feasible alternative.”
Agreeing that she should continue to live in the UK, the judge further added, “I find there would be a breach of family life on part of the Appellant and on the part of her son, Mr Shashi Garg, if the Appellant were to leave.”
Garg family's journey to today's success
Shashi's father Dr Pyare Lal Garg, an eye surgeon in India, passed away in June 2015. That left Shashi's mother alone in Muzaffarnagar in Uttar Pradesh, India, with a weak heart, partial disability, a need for hip replacement and onset of dementia.
After a brief discussion with his wife Manvi, Shashi decided not to leave his mother alone in India any longer, but bring her to live with them in the UK, at least for a short period. She arrived in the UK on a tourist visa, that was meant to expire in 6 months. While in the UK, she suddenly suffered a heart attack and this made Shashi more confident about having his frail mother living with them permanently, especially under their personal and physical care.
Shashi spoke to Solicitor Usha Sood from the Trent Chambers, a renowned firm dealing with Human Rights cases. They made an application for Ratna's leave to remain, which was first rejected by the Home Office, also denying them a right to in-country appeal.
Speaking to Asian Voice, in an exclusive interview last year, Shashi said, “I live and work in Oxford. I have a Masters and PhD from this country. My children, my wife and I- all are British. All parents have the right to enjoy support from their children when they are retired and finding it difficult and lonely to cope with ageing issues. Not allowing our parents to come to UK is to take away their rights to live with their children in their old age.
“Though we had expected this rejection, it was heart breaking to think my helpless mother would have to go back to India and stay all by herself. Of course the care level in the UK and India are not the same. We are not comparing the systems. The issue is more on human grounds.
“My mother is old, frail, lonely and unwell. More than medical assistance, she needs physical and personal care from her immediate family- and we are all settled here. So we went ahead with a Judicial Review in the Upper Tribunal, on the basis of Article 3 and 8 of the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights). And we demanded for an oral hearing, which was held on 20 March. I tried raising funds to cope with the high costs of litigation and I have spent so much money for this case from my own pocket and savings.”
The review fortunately turned out to be in the family's favour. The Judge allowed the grounds in full, as she was convinced that the Home Office had not responded to the application fully and some of the main arguments in the initial application, went unanswered.
“The Judge has also made it clear that if refusal is maintained, the applicant must be given the right to in-country appeal and payment of reasonable costs, which we are keeping reserved for the time being. We just hope her leave to remain is granted,” added Shashi.
In 2016 an organisation called BritCits, a forum campaigning for the rights of elderly parents of British citizens in India, challenged the government's virtual prohibition on the entry of adult dependant relatives (introduced in 2012), but it was dismissed. BritCits was formed in 2012 as a direct response to the attack on British citizens and residents with non-EEA family members.
