ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Financial Dependency

Forum to discuss all things Blarney | Ireland immigration

Moderators: Casa, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, Zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, push, Administrator

Locked
Capricorn
Junior Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 1:01 am
Ireland

Financial Dependency

Post by Capricorn » Thu Jan 16, 2020 12:04 pm

Hi

Can someone guide me what this statement means:

"What it to be assessed is whether a family member has a real need for financial assistance and not whether that person could survive without it"


This comes from the court of appeal VK vs Minister for Justice in regards to proof of dependency.

I am trying to establish if a person owns a property that they live in and another which they are renting, but the rental income is not sufficient for meeting basic needs and is reliant on additional support, can the Minister claim that the rental property can instead of sold and lived off the sales proceeds?

Thanks

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 14657
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Re: Financial Dependency

Post by Obie » Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:34 pm

The Court of Appeal case, is a good case.

The test of whether a person needs financial support from a person, is much more liberal than the test of whether they can survive without it.

If a person has a Home, then it is the proceeds of that Home and whether it is required to meet their essential needs, that counts.

A person cannot be told to sell their home to survive. it is what they have as income or savings that will be taken into account and not asset that they could see.

Just like a person cannot be asked why they cannot work to provide for their needs, a person cannot also be asked to see their property or asset.

in the below case, the Respondent lost, not because they had a property worth £80,000, but because they have £55,000 savings that they could survive on, but choose to save it as inheritance for their children.

The court found that those saving can be used for their upkeep but they choose not to use it.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2015/1383.html
Black life matters.

Locked
cron