Can a child obtain ILR when only 1 parent is settled?

Indefinite leave to remain is granted to an individual. A child who has accompanied a parent through previous applications does not become settled by implication when that parent qualifies. The child must be included where the relevant process permits it or make a separate valid application under the correct settlement provision.

The distinction becomes particularly significant when the parents have different immigration histories, separated after the child's permission was granted, hold different forms of leave or will qualify for settlement at different times. The parent may satisfy every requirement for ILR while the child does not yet satisfy the parental status, residence or dependency requirements applicable to the child's case.

A settlement decision for the parent should therefore be approached as a change in the family's legal configuration. It is not evidence that every dependant is automatically entitled to the same result.

For a child connected to an adult settling on the 5-year family route as a partner or parent, the current Home Office guidance identifies paragraph 298 of Part 8 as the relevant child settlement provision. The application must be tested against that paragraph, not against a general assumption that Appendix FM automatically grants the child settlement alongside the adult.

Where the parent is settling, or previously settled, as a partner or parent after a qualifying period of 10 years, the child's position falls to be considered under Appendix Settlement Family Life. Its validity, parental relationship, age, dependency, care, English language and knowledge of life requirements are set out separately in paragraphs SETF 10.1 to SETF 17.5.

These regimes are materially different. Paragraph 298 expressly recognises a child who normally lives with the settled parent and not the other parent. The child provisions in Appendix Settlement Family Life do not contain the same normal residence exception where the other parent is not settled or British. Transplanting an exception from one route into the other can defeat an otherwise carefully prepared application.

The same caution applies to dependants of Skilled Workers and other economic migrants. Their settlement applications are governed by the relevant work route and its dependant provisions, not by paragraph 298 merely because the underlying question also concerns a parent and child.

Where both parents are present and settled in the UK, paragraph 298(i)(a) provides the conventional starting position. Where only 1 parent is settled, the application must instead identify the particular circumstance in paragraph 298(i) which reflects the family's actual position.

Paragraph 298(i)(b) covers a settled parent where the other parent has died. Paragraph 298(i)(c) covers a settled parent who has had sole responsibility for the child's upbringing or a child who normally lives with that settled parent and not the other parent. Sole responsibility and normal residence are separate alternatives within the same provision.

Paragraph 298(i)(d) addresses a settled parent, or a parent being admitted on the same occasion for settlement, by reference to the other parent's limited permission and the availability of serious and compelling reasons. Its precise wording and the immigration position of both parents must be considered together; it should not be treated as a free standing compassionate exception available whenever a family would prefer the child to settle immediately.

Paragraph 298(i)(e) concerns a settled close relative rather than a parent. It requires the applicant to have no other family who could reasonably be expected to provide care or support. The existence, availability and capacity of other relatives must therefore be examined before a close relative case is presented.

1. 01
   Sole surviving parent

   Prove the other parent's death, the settled parent's status and the continuing family relationship.

2. 02
   Sole responsibility

   Show that the settled parent has exercised continuing control over the important decisions in the child's upbringing.

3. 03
   Normal residence

   Establish that the child normally lives with the settled parent and not the other parent, without inaccurately alleging that parental responsibility is exclusive.

4. 04
   Serious and compelling reasons

   Identify the applicable paragraph, the other parent's status and the evidence that makes settlement necessary in the particular circumstances.

5. 05
   Close relative

   Explain why no other family member can reasonably be expected to provide the required care or support.

A child can normally live with 1 parent while both parents remain meaningfully involved in major decisions. In that situation, an application under paragraph 298(i)(c) may be better grounded in the child's actual residence than in an unsustainable assertion that the settled parent has sole responsibility.

The evidence for normal residence should establish where the child lives in substance. School registration, medical records, household records, correspondence, a properly disclosable family court order and a consistent account from each parent may all assist. Weekend contact, school holidays or occasional overnight stays do not, without more, establish that a child normally lives with the other parent.

Sole responsibility asks a different question. The focus is continuing control over the child's upbringing, including important decisions about education, health, residence and welfare. A parent may provide the main home without exercising sole control, and a parent living elsewhere may retain significant responsibility. Custody, consent and financial support are relevant evidence, but none is a substitute for the correct legal test.

The distinction must remain route specific. Normal residence is expressly available under paragraph 298(i)(c), but SETF 12.2 contains no equivalent exception for a child applying under the 10-year family settlement framework.

A child applying under Appendix Settlement Family Life must be in the UK and must apply as the child of a parent whose valid 10-year partner or parent settlement application remains undecided, or who previously settled or became British after holding permission on the relevant 10-year family route. Unless born in the UK, the child must have, or last have had, permission as a dependent child.

Under SETF 12.2, the other parent must be settling at the same time, already settled or British unless the relevant parent is the child's sole surviving parent, has sole responsibility for the child's upbringing, or there are serious and compelling reasons to grant settlement. The fact that the child normally lives with the settling parent is not listed as a separate exception.

This can materially change the outcome for separated parents. A child who normally lives with a settled parent and remains in regular contact with the other parent may have a clear argument under paragraph 298 but a more difficult case under SETF 12.2. The question is not which formulation appears more favourable. It is which framework lawfully governs the family's application.

The application process also differs. Current public guidance states that a child applying in connection with a parent settling on the 10-year route must submit a separate child application. The parent's pending application or qualifying settled history must therefore be correctly identified before the child's form is filed.

An applicant who entered or previously held permission as a qualifying dependent child does not necessarily lose access to settlement on turning 18. Under paragraph 298, eligibility depends upon whether the applicant can establish the particular permission history recognised by paragraph 298(ii) and, where applicable, the admission and knowledge requirements in paragraph 298(vii).

Under Appendix Settlement Family Life, an applicant aged 18 or over may remain eligible where they were last granted permission as the dependent child of their parent or parents. An applicant aged 16 or over must not be leading an independent life. Marriage, an independent family unit, a permanent home away from the family or financial independence may therefore require close examination.

Full time study does not automatically establish independence. A young adult living away from the family home because of university or another genuine educational arrangement may remain dependent, but the evidence should explain accommodation, financial support, term dates and the continuing family relationship.

Adults must also meet the relevant English language and knowledge of life requirements unless an exemption applies. The current Rules provide for the English language threshold to move from B1 to B2 for applications made on or after 26 March 2027. The correct appendix and the date of application must be checked before a family fixes its settlement timetable.

The relevant question is not simply whether the person is the settled parent's child. It is whether the child's present or previous permission connects to a category recognised by the applicable settlement provision. Grant letters, previous applications, entry records and the conditions attached to permission should be reviewed before the family assumes that a dependent relationship is enough.

Paragraph 298 requires the applicant to have or have had limited leave to enter or remain and then satisfy the age or route specific conditions in paragraph 298(ii). For a person aged 18 or over, a historic grant that does not fall within the listed categories may be a material obstacle even where the parent has since become settled.

Appendix Settlement Family Life separately requires the applicant to have, or last have had, permission as a dependent child unless the applicant was born in the UK. A switch into another route, a gap in lawful permission or an inaccurately described immigration history can therefore change the validity or merits of the application.

Where the child has a different expiry date from the parent, the family should decide whether settlement, a further grant of limited permission or an alternative route is the appropriate immediate step. Preserving lawful status can be more important than forcing simultaneous ILR applications which the Rules do not support.

A child born in the UK is not automatically British merely because of the place of birth. The position depends upon the parents' nationality and immigration status at the date of birth and, in some cases, what happens afterwards.

Where a child was born in the UK before a parent became settled and remains under 18, the parent's later grant of ILR may create an entitlement to apply for registration as a British citizen under the relevant nationality provisions. The official nationality guidance identifies the parent's later settlement as a qualifying event for a UK born child applying before their 18th birthday.

Where a parent was already British or settled when the child was born in the UK, the child may already be a British citizen and may not need a settlement application at all. The nationality position should be established from the date and place of birth, the parents' status at that time and any subsequent settlement decision.

Citizenship registration and immigration permission remain different legal processes. The family should consider travel, evidence of status, application timing and the child's existing permission rather than assuming that the availability of a citizenship application answers every immediate immigration question.

Paragraph 298 requires the child to be maintained and accommodated adequately by the parent, parents or close relative the child was admitted to join, without recourse to public funds. Accommodation must be owned or occupied exclusively by the relevant household and must not be overcrowded or contrary to applicable public health requirements.

The analysis should include the actual household composition, any dependants who are not part of the application, the basis on which the property is occupied and the financial resources available for the family. A tenancy agreement or bank balance is useful only if the underlying position supports the required accommodation and maintenance assessment.

Under Appendix Settlement Family Life, a child under 18 must have suitable arrangements for care and accommodation which comply with UK law. That requirement should not be conflated with the separate maintenance and accommodation wording in paragraph 298. The applicable route determines both the legal proposition and the documents needed to prove it.

Child settlement applications remain subject to Part Suitability. Earlier immigration breaches, false information, criminality and other relevant adverse matters must be considered in context and against the precise provisions governing the applicant's route. The parent's successful application does not erase a separate suitability issue affecting the child.

Paragraph 298A permits a further grant of limited leave of up to 30 months in specified cases where settlement fails only because of particular criminality related suitability grounds or, for an applicant aged 18 or over, the knowledge requirements in paragraph 298(vii). It is not a general power to overlook an incorrect parental exception, missing qualifying permission or inadequate evidence.

Appendix Settlement Family Life has a different mechanism. Under SETF 17.2 to SETF 17.4, a settlement application may be varied to an application for permission to stay where the decision maker considers that the child is likely to satisfy the relevant Appendix FM requirements or another stated basis. The settlement fee is not refunded, and an Immigration Health Charge may be requested.

Neither provision should be treated as a reason to submit an unsupported settlement application. The responsible approach is to identify the viable outcome before filing and preserve the child's lawful position if immediate settlement is not available.

The correct sequence depends upon whether the parent is already settled, applying now or will qualify later; which route produced the parent's permission; whether the other parent is British, settled, applying at the same time or subject to limited permission; and whether the child's own grant preserves the intended settlement route.

A simultaneous application can be appropriate where the Rules expressly connect the child's eligibility to a parent being granted settlement at the same time. A sequential application may be preferable where the parent's decision must first establish the qualifying status, further evidence is required, or the child needs to preserve existing permission while a separate issue is resolved.

Age, expiry dates and the ability to satisfy language or knowledge requirements may also affect timing. A child approaching 18 or an adult applicant approaching the change from B1 to B2 on 26 March 2027 may need an earlier and more carefully evidenced decision.

For separated and blended families, the immigration position should also be reconciled with residence arrangements, parental consent, any family proceedings and the child's best interests. A family court order may establish an important fact, but the order does not itself determine which Immigration Rule applies or whether a settlement requirement has been met.