Illegal immigrant could stay in UK if she wins ‘Catch 22’ care battle

A homeless illegal immigrant is likely to be allowed to remain in the UK and have a right to be considered for housing if she wins a family court fight over the care of her seven-year-old son, a judge says.

Judge Carol Atkinson has described the case as “Catch 22”.

Social workers did not think the woman should care for the little boy because she had no “recourse” to housing as a result of her “lack of immigration status”, said the judge.

But, if she were to be allowed to care for him, she could have “immigration status” and housing, and might be acceptable as a carer.

The judge has outlined detail in a preliminary ruling on the case following a hearing at a family court in London. She did not identify the woman or child.

But she indicated the woman came from east London and said the local authority involved was the London Borough of Barking & Dagenham.

Judge Atkinson said the little boy had been placed in foster care while options for his future were considered.

Social services bosses said the youngster should live with a relative.

But a guardian, appointed by a judge to guard the little boy’s welfare interests, thought that he should live with his mother – who, the judge said, had no right to legal aid.

“The mother has no leave to remain in the UK,” said the judge.

“As a result of her lack of immigration status, she is homeless and is not entitled to housing support.

“It is agreed, however, that should the court make an order placing the child in her care, then her immigration status is likely to change.

“In those circumstances, she is likely to acquire the right to remain as a carer.”

She went on: “With the right to remain – even if derivatively – will come the right to be considered for housing.”

The judge said the council’s case against the woman was based on “her lack of housing and lack of immigration status”.

But the judge said the law required local authorities to assess carers on the basis of “services that would be available to them”.

She added: “Thus it is that when considering the mother in this case as a potential carer, the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham must do so on the basis that if identified as the primary carer for (her son), she will likely be entitled to remain in the UK and she will likely be entitled to housing.”

Judge Atkinson said the woman appeared to be in a “Catch 22” situation – “not acceptable as a carer because she had no recourse to housing as a direct result of her lack of immigration status, yet were she to be given care of the child she would have immigration status and housing, and might then be acceptable as a carer”.

Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2015, All Rights Reserved.