Wife loses battle in immigration case
Husband can't speak English to move to UK
London: An Indian woman who argued that immigration rules preventing her husband from moving to the UK because he cannot speak English were a breach of the couple's human rights has lost her case.
British citizen Rashida Chapti, 54, argued that her husband of 37 years, Vali Chapti, should be allowed to join her from India.
But immigration rules announced by Home Secretary Theresa May last year introduced new English language requirements for those moving to Britain to join a spouse.
Chapti, who has six children with her 57-year-old husband, argued in the High Court in Birmingham that the rule was a breach of the couple's right to a private and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Using legal aid to fight her case, she also argued that it was a breach of the right to marriage, and the right to be free from discrimination.
On Friday, Justice Beatson ruled that the English language requirement did not amount to a breach of the couple's human rights and dismissed the case.
He said: "The new rule does not indirectly discriminate on the ground of nationality, ethnic origins or disability."
Chapti, from Leicester, who speaks only halting English herself, vowed to appeal against the decision.
Through a translator, she said: "Naturally I feel very disappointed. It is Christmas and I will be alone without my husband. We will keep fighting for him to come here.'
She said it would be easier for her husband, a farmer from the Gujarat village of Valan, to learn English in Britain than India.
Chapti, a machinist in a clothes factory, moved to the UK with her parents six years ago, using a British protected passport issued when they lived in Malawi, which was a UK colony. She is believed to have been commuting between India and Leicester for years.
After successfully applying for naturalisation as a British citizen, she attempted to "send for" her husband and their youngest child.
— Daily Mail
