High Court rejects Windrush descendant’s appeal for indefinite leave to remain

Jeanell Hippolyte, 41, a woman whose father is a member of the Windrush generation, has had her High Court appeal dismissed following the denial of her application for indefinite leave to remain (ILR). Ms. Hippolyte, mother of two UK-born children, contested the Home Office’s decision not to reconsider its refusal, especially since her father and brothers had been granted ILR based on her father’s Windrush status. While her legal representatives asserted that her situation was “identical” to that of her brothers, the Home Office maintained that her application was “lawfully refused”. On Wednesday, Mr Justice Clive Sheldon issued a ruling dismissing Ms. Hippolyte’s case, stating that she had not experienced a “historic injustice”. He elaborated, stating: “The Secretary of State would have been highly likely to decide that, although the claimant was a child of a member of the Windrush generation, her claim was not really equivalent to a Windrush scheme claim, as she, and her father, Cletus Hippolyte, had not suffered a historic injustice.” He further added that: “The Secretary of State would have been highly likely to decide that there was no reason therefore for the Secretary of State to make an exception to the Windrush scheme in the claimant’s case.” During a two-day hearing held last month in a London court, it was revealed that Ms. Hippolyte, a Saint Lucian national, initially arrived in the UK in 2000 at the age of 17 as a student. She subsequently departed in 2002 to adhere to immigration regulations after her student visa lapsed. Chris Buttler KC, her barrister, stated in written submissions that her father’s ILR status was not formally approved until 2003. He argued that she left the UK because the Home Office had not provided her father with identity status documents confirming this. Mr. Buttler explained that Ms. Hippolyte “did not make an application because she did not know that her father had ILR” status. The court was informed that her brothers entered the UK in 2007. Their initial ILR applications were rejected, and they subsequently overstayed, violating immigration rules, before successfully applying under the Windrush Scheme in 2019. Mr. Buttler further asserted: “Here the only relevant difference between the claimant and her brothers is that she complied with immigration control and they did not.” William Hansen, representing the Home Office, indicated in written submissions that Ms. Hippolyte submitted an application to the Windrush Scheme in August 2020. This application was denied in February 2021 on the grounds that she had “not been continuously resident in the UK” since her initial arrival. He added that a request for a review of the application was turned down in July 2021, and a new application to the scheme was submitted in October 2022. This subsequent application was also refused for the same reasons, and additional review requests were rejected in 2023. He contended that Ms. Hippolyte and her siblings were in a “materially different position”. Ms. Hippolyte expressed that she was “devastated” by the court’s judgement. She stated: “It will turn my own life and that of my children upside down.” She concluded: “I hope to appeal the judgement and fight on for the right to stay in the UK, which is my home and my children’s home.”