Proportionality post Mirga

Client’s UC appeal has just been adjourned to gather more evidence. The main issue is whether client’s EEA parent (client is a non-EEA adult dependant) had a qualifying right to reside at the time of client’s UC claim. Among our arguments is that parent stopped working to care for client, who is seriously ill, and so parent should retain worker status.

The adjournment notice says that the next hearing should be in front of a District Tribunal Judge because the appeal involves proportionality issues, and references the Mirga case.

What should I read into this?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.