Y (Failure to Clarify Immigration Status), Re
[2024] EWFC 159
AB v XX & Anor (Special Guardianship Orders)
8 October 2023
[2023] EWFC 287
Family Court
An uncle tried to get a special guardianship order so he could stay in the UK. The judge said no, because it wasn't needed for childcare, and using it for immigration was cheating the system.
Key Facts
- •Application for a Special Guardianship Order (SGO) for two children (aged 8 and 6) by their maternal uncle (AB).
- •Children live with their mother and two older siblings.
- •Father and uncle live separately.
- •Application ostensibly to allow uncle to collect children from school and provide after-school care.
- •Mother and father support the application.
- •Actual reason for application revealed to be supporting the uncle's immigration application.
- •Uncle does not meet the criteria for applying for an SGO under section 14A(5) of the Children Act 1989.
Legal Principles
Special Guardianship Orders are for providing greater permanence and security for a child's placement.
Re S (Adoption Order or Special Guardianship Order) [2007] 1 FLR 819 and Re T (A Child: Refusal of Adoption Order) [2020] EWCA Civ 797
An SGO is not necessary for a family member to collect children from school or provide after-school care; a letter from parents to the school suffices.
Judgement in this case
Misusing the SGO jurisdiction to support an immigration application is an abuse of process.
Judgement in this case
Outcomes
Leave for the SGO application refused.
The court found the application's true purpose was to aid the uncle's immigration case, an abuse of process. An SGO was unnecessary for the stated reason of school collection and after-school care.