“The Petitioner continued to live with the respondent for sixteen months or so after finding out about the adultery. She says she found out in December 2004 and he did not leave till April 2006. She cannot therefore rely on adultery as grounds for divorce, seeMatrimonial Causes Act 1973, s.2 (1) .”
“Subject to paragraph (2), for the purposes of these Regulations the following persons shall be treated as the family members of another person – (a) his spouse or his civil partner…”
“15. —(1) The following persons shall acquire the right to reside in the United Kingdom permanently— (a) an EEA national who has resided in the United Kingdom in accordance with these Regulations for a continuous period of five years; (b) a family member of an EEA national who is not himself an EEA national but who has resided in the United Kingdom with the EEA national in accordance with these Regulations for a continuous period of five years; (c) a worker or self-employed person who has ceased activity; (d) the family member of a worker or self-employed person who has ceased activity; (e) a person who was the family member of a worker or self-employed person where— (i) the worker or self-employed person has died; (ii) the family member resided with him immediately before his death; and (iii) the worker or self-employed person had resided continuously in the United Kingdom for at least the two years immediately before his death or the death was the result of an accident at work or an occupational disease; (f) a person who— (i) has resided in the United Kingdom in accordance with these Regulations for a continuous period of five years; and (ii) was, at the end of that period, a family member who has retained the right of residence. (2) Once acquired, the right of permanent residence under this regulation shall be lost only through absence from the United Kingdom for a period exceeding two consecutive years.
“It must be added that the marital relationship cannot be regarded as dissolved so long as it has not been terminated by the competent authority. It is not dissolved merely because the spouses live separately, even where they intend to divorce at a later date.”
“There is no reason evinced why the right of residence should be retained only by a divorced spouse and not by a spouse who is in the process of obtaining a divorce. The alternative interpretation, that the marriage relationship be broken down, provides protection to all family members who have suffered breakdown of a relationship with an EEA spouse. It does not bring about any artificial interruption of lawful residence during a period when cohabitation has ceased but an order of divorce is not yet made, as does the more limited interpretation. Had it been the intention of the lawgiver to require that the marriage had been terminated by final order of divorce, it would have been a simple matter to insert in the provisions, after the word ‘termination’, the words ‘by divorce’ or any the words deemed appropriate. It is not necessary to insert any words into the provision in order to permit the word termination to have its widest meaning embracing the effective breakdown of the marriage relationship and the termination of cohabitation. I consider that the wider meaning of the word termination is, for these reasons, to be preferred. The facts show that the appellant had lived with her spouse for three years prior to the date of institution of the proceedings and that they lived together for at least one year in the United Kingdom. The appellant has therefore retained a right of residence and meets the requirements of Regulation 10(5) and accordingly of Regulation 15(f)(ii).”
“As evidence of the exercise of Treaty rights in the United Kingdom by your EEA or Swiss family member, both currently and continuously over the past 5 years, please provide the following documents: For time spent in employment letter(s) from your family member’s employer(s) confirming employment, P60s and most recent wage slips.”” (Emphasis added)