Secretary of State for the Home Department v Kingsley Manyo
[2024] UKUT 362 (IAC)
Secretary of State for the Home Department v Katarina Vargova
26 September 2024
[2024] UKUT 336 (IAC)
Upper Tribunal
After Brexit, an EU citizen committed a crime. A lower court said deportation was unfair based on old EU rules. The higher court disagreed, saying new UK laws apply after Brexit, not the old EU ones. The higher court sent the case back to be re-decided using the correct UK laws.
Key Facts
- •Katarina Vargova, a Slovakian citizen, was convicted on 27 September 2022 for possession of a Class A drug with intent to supply.
- •She was sentenced to 2 years and 1 month imprisonment.
- •A Stage 1 deportation decision was issued on 12 November 2022.
- •Ms Vargova appealed the Stage 1 decision, arguing it was disproportionate.
- •The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) allowed Ms Vargova's appeal, finding the deportation decision disproportionate under EU law.
- •The Secretary of State appealed the FTT's decision to the Upper Tribunal (UT).
Legal Principles
A ‘bright line’ distinction exists between pre- and post-transition period offenses for EU citizens regarding deportation.
Article 20 of the Withdrawal Agreement
Pre-transition period offenses are considered under Chapter VI of Directive 2004/38/EC.
Article 20(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement
Post-transition period offenses are judged according to UK domestic law; EU law proportionality does not apply.
Article 20(2) of the Withdrawal Agreement
Article 21 of the Withdrawal Agreement provides procedural, not substantive, safeguards for post-transition period offenses.
Article 21 of the Withdrawal Agreement
A Stage 1 decision is not a decision restricting residence rights; only the lawfulness of the decision-making process is considered on appeal.
Regulation 6 and 8 of the Immigration (Citizens’ Rights Appeals) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020
Proportionality assessments under Article 31(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC do not apply to post-transition period offenses.
Article 31(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC
Outcomes
The Upper Tribunal set aside the First-tier Tribunal's decision.
The FTT judge erred in law by applying EU law proportionality principles to Ms Vargova's case, which involved a post-transition period offense. The application of EU law was incorrect under the Withdrawal Agreement.
The appeal was remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard alongside Ms Vargova's pending Stage 2 appeal.
This ensures all matters are considered together for efficiency and fairness.
Similar Cases
The Secretary of State for the Home Department v AA (Poland)
[2024] EWCA Civ 18
VLT (Vietnam), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] UKUT 67 (IAC)
Secretary of State for the Home Department v William George
[2024] EWCA Civ 1192
S M v Secretary Of State For The Home Department
[2024] UKUT 323 (IAC)