Page 1 of 1

SET(M) Hypothetical Scenario - Meeting 5 years residence but not MIR

Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:24 pm
by MrGamgee
Hi all

I have come across this document on Gov UK website which mentions something interesting on page 58 within the PDF:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... yB_MILEEwz

It states the following:
“Prior to the last decision, the customer had completed a continuous period of 60 months
on the Spouse/Partner route. The last grant was made under the Family/Private life route to
a failure to meet the MIR.
As the customer has that “banked” period of continuous leave on the 5 year route and the
failure to be granted ILR was not time related, the 10-year route does not preclude them for
applying for ILR at any time during that period of leave if they can demonstrate they have
addressed the reason for failure in this case MIR and continue to meet all other suitability
and eligibility requirements and submit a paid application.
It is not currently made clear in our grant letters that this course of action is open to them.”
Is there anything within the rules that prevent this? I was of the understanding that if a person was on the 5 year route and has completed 5 years but then could not meet the MIR, the applicant would then have to be put on the 10 year route and the clock is reset, however, what I read in that document seems to contradict my understanding?

Is it possible for someone to have spent 5 years on the 5 year route, then could not meet the MIR and then is placed on the 10 year route, to then be able to apply for SET(M) immediately once meeting the MIR on the basis of "previously" completing 5 years under the 5 year route?

Re: SET(M) Hypothetical Scenario - Meeting 5 years residence but not MIR

Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:32 pm
by MrGamgee

Re: SET(M) Hypothetical Scenario - Meeting 5 years residence but not MIR

Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:07 pm
by zimba
The usual interpretation has been that provisions under paragraph E-ILRP.1.3 require you to have completed a period of continuous residence in the UK on the date of application. So the move to the 10-year route presumably breaks the continuity requirement:
E-ILRP.1.3. (1) Subject to subparagraph (2), the applicant must, at the date of application, have completed a period of continuous residence in the UK of at least 5 years (60 months) with the following:

(a) leave to enter granted on the basis of entry clearance as a partner granted under paragraph D-ECP.1.1; or
(b) limited leave to remain as a partner granted under paragraph D-LTRP.1.1; or
(c) a combination of leave under (a) and (b).
However, I can see that we may interpret the above requirement as historical and so it can be relied on to secure ILR even after moving to the 10-year route

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration ... ly-members

Re: SET(M) Hypothetical Scenario - Meeting 5 years residence but not MIR

Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:21 pm
by MrGamgee
That makes sense. Thanks Zimba