Ivan Khomych v Home Office: tax record gaps defeat EU Settlement Scheme appeal

A Ukrainian national's bid for settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme has been dismissed by the First-tier Tribunal after he failed to provide evidence of five years' continuous residence in the United Kingdom, and did not engage with either the Home Office or the tribunal at any stage of the proceedings.

Ivan Khomych, who had held several visitor visas between 2006 and 2012 before being issued a residence card under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 and later pre-settled status in July 2019, applied for settled status ahead of the scheme's deadline. The Home Office wrote to him three times requesting further evidence of his residence, including proof covering the period between April 2019 and March 2024, but received no response.

In its refusal decision of 19 April 2024, the Home Office found that while there was evidence of periodic residence between April 2018 and January 2023, it fell short of five continuous years and could not be relied upon given inconsistencies between the tax year overviews submitted and its own checks against Mr Khomych's national insurance number. It also noted that his most recent evidence of residence predated the application by more than six months.

Mr Khomych appealed but, according to Judge J K Swaney, failed to comply with two separate tribunal directions requiring him to explain his case, first in September 2024 and again in November 2024. Despite this, the Home Office was directed to complete its review, which it provided in January 2025, and Mr Khomych was again given the opportunity to respond, which he did not take up.

Although Mr Khomych had asked for his appeal to be decided on the papers and had been told this was how it would proceed, a notice of an in-person hearing dated January 2026 was uploaded to the tribunal's case management system in May 2026, a four-month delay the judge described as unexplained. It was also unclear whether the notice had ever reached the appellant, as there was no record of it having been sent by email or text.

The tribunal nonetheless proceeded to determine the appeal in Mr Khomych's absence, citing the Upper Tribunal's guidance in SSGA (Disposal without considering merits, R25) Iraq and Ghira (R25, AIP, Fairness) Romania on the application of rule 25 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules. The judge found no credibility issues that would make the case unsuitable for paper determination, noted that the appellant's contact details matched across both the Home Office and tribunal records, and considered that his sustained non-engagement gave no reason to think an adjournment would produce a different outcome.

On the substance of the case, the tribunal found that the tax documents submitted by Mr Khomych, covering tax years between 2016 and 2023, showed only three years in which he had paid or reclaimed tax, with unexplained gaps in 2018/19 and 2022/23 and unexplained penalties in 2020/21 and 2021/22. The judge noted that penalties can arise for various reasons, including late filing or payment, and could not on their own establish residence.

With no evidence of Mr Khomych's presence in the UK after April 2023, the tribunal found that he had established neither five years of continuous qualifying residence under paragraph EU11 of Appendix EU, nor an ongoing qualifying period under paragraph EU14. In its judgement, the tribunal dismissed the appeal, and no fee award was made.