An Iranian man facing deportation has been allowed to remain in the UK after a judge ruled that removing him would have a severe emotional impact on his three-year-old son, whom he sees daily and helps care for.
The man, whose identity remains protected, had a long and troubled immigration history. He first entered the UK in July 2004 and claimed asylum, stating he was at risk in Iran because his girlfriend’s parents reported him for having premarital sex. Authorities rejected his claim due to inconsistencies.
Despite a failed appeal in 2005, he remained in the country. In 2008, he was convicted for possessing a false identity document and sentenced to 12 months in prison. After his release, he was served a deportation order.
Attempts to overturn the deportation were dismissed by the Home Office in 2011. The man then evaded authorities between 2013 and 2018. In 2022, his human rights claim was also rejected, and officials said he had no legal basis to remain.
However, the First-tier Tribunal later overturned that decision, citing the potential emotional harm to the man’s young child. Judge Michael Blackwell found that deportation would have “unduly harsh consequences” for the boy, saying simple parental acts like playing and cutting hair could not be done from abroad.
The judge emphasized the importance of daily interactions for a child of that age, writing, “Relationships such as play… cannot be easily satisfied remotely. Nor can hair be cut remotely.”
The man lives near his partner and sees his son every day, engaging in activities such as playing and caring for him. According to testimony, he is deeply involved in the child’s upbringing and wishes to teach him about their shared Kurdish heritage.
Lawyers for the man argued that political tensions in Iran would make it difficult for his son to visit him there.
The Home Office appealed the tribunal’s decision. Upper Tribunal Judge Vinesh Mandalia agreed that the initial ruling lacked sufficient justification. He noted that while the father does play a role in the child’s life, the child lives primarily with his mother, and having both parents in the UK is not, in itself, enough to stop deportation.
Judge Mandalia stated, “The fact that the son will not be able to play with his father daily or have his hair cut by him might be described as harsh or inconvenient, but that is not the test.”
The case will be reheard at a later date.
