The legal arguments on family life between adult children and parents are notoriously tricky. The guise in which the issue arose in Pun & Anr (Nepal) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 2106 was whether non-dependent adult children could qualify under the Gurkha policy. The court ultimately held that the absence of dependency was fatal to the family’s case.
In this case, the appellants were the son and daughter-in-law of Mr Ril Pun. The wife had arrived in the UK on a Tier 4 (General) Student visa. The husband had joined her shortly afterwards. Both then applied for Indefinite Leave to Remain as adult dependent relatives of Mr Ril Pun. The application was refused primarily on the basis that neither was actually dependent and that their private life in the UK was insufficient to bring them within the scope of the Gurkha policy.
Whilst the position with adult children has always been difficult, this case highlights just how important demonstrating dependency is. Even the historic injustice to Gurkhas could only be given limited weight, in the interests of maintaining immigration control. In the general run of cases, there is unlikely to be any Gurkha policy argument to make. Such cases start on the back foot.