ICT and ILR (long residence)

A Tier 2 ICT high earner migrant is allowed to stay in the UK for up to 9 years.

His wife obtains a Skilled Worker visa and he switches to a dependant visa.

Can the migrant apply for settlement on the basis of 9 years residence on the ICT visa plus 1 year on the dependant visa provided both periods have been lawful an continuous?

Immigration rule SW 42.1 stipulates for dependants of skilled workers:

"The applicant must have spent a continuous period of 5 years in the UK with permission as a dependent partner..."

How does this square up with the requirements for settlement on the long residence (10 year) route?

Can the migrant apply for settlement on the basis of 9 years residence on the ICT visa plus 1 year on the dependant visa provided both periods have been lawful an continuous?

Yes.

Immigration rule SW 42.1 stipulates for dependants of skilled workers:

"The applicant must have spent a continuous period of 5 years in the UK with permission as a dependent partner..."

How does this square up with the requirements for settlement on the long residence (10 year) route?

Long residence rules are completely separate and independent of PBS rules. All visas count for long residence ILR, even visitor visas.

Welcome back manci after a long hiatus. Many Tier 2 applicants like me have immensely benefitted from your advice in the past

Thank you CR001

As the long residence (10 year) rules allow any category of lawful residence to be taken into account do you reckon that the ICT caseworker guidance (page 6) is therefore incorrect or at least incomplete?:

"The Intra-Company routes are not routes to settlement, and permission in these
routes will not count towards the qualifying period of stay required to settle, should
an applicant later apply to settle under another route."
"

manci wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 26, 2021 3:38 pm

Thank you CR001

As the long residence (10 year) rules allow any category of lawful residence to be taken into account do you reckon that the ICT caseworker guidance (page 6) is therefore incorrect or at least incomplete?:

"The Intra-Company routes are not routes to settlement, and permission in these
routes will not count towards the qualifying period of stay required to settle, should
an applicant later apply to settle under another route."
"

I'd say it is not comprehensive but not totally wrong. I believe they meant to say that migrants under ICT cannot use their residence period to settle under other PBS routes