Article 8 (family life) — what the bill changes
Article 8 ECHR is the right to family and private life; people rely on it against removal or a refusal of entry for family. The bill (clauses 17–20) narrows it: for the first time it writes into law that "family" is normally only the "core" cohabiting family, and it raises the public-interest and deportation thresholds. This is not law yet. And crucially: the real degree of narrowing will be shown only by the first court decisions — the key words in the law are evaluative.
Clauses 17–20 are part of the Immigration and Asylum Bill (introduced 30 June 2026, now at 2nd reading). The current case law still applies. Even once the bill becomes law, the precise new bar will be set by the courts — see below.
Where things stand now
Article 8 is applied case by case: a court looks at the specific facts of a family under Strasbourg and UK case law. There is no statutory definition of "family life" — the courts developed it. It is a balance: the right to family against the public interest (safety, order, the economy).
What the bill proposes — 4 clauses
A new "sponsor human rights claim": the Article 8 claim for a relative abroad is made by the family member in the UK (a citizen, settled person, or person with protection status), and they have a right of appeal against a refusal of entry. This is procedure; it does not set income or language conditions.
For the first time in law: family life is normally limited to the "core cohabiting family" — spouse/partner, children under 18, parents (if you are under 18), and only while you live together. With other adults there is family life only where there is "dependency beyond normal emotional ties". Financial help, illness, emotional support, or living in a country at war do not by themselves count as such dependency.
No weight is given to family or private life built while a person is in the UK unlawfully or in serious breach. Added to the public interest: no criminal conviction, co-operation with immigration authorities, and being "of good character". The test of when it is unreasonable to expect a child to leave the UK is narrowed.
Deportation is in the public interest unless its effect would be "disproportionate". It is disproportionate only where one of three sets of "exceptional circumstances" applies (long lawful residence + integration + very significant obstacles in the destination country; or an "unduly harsh" effect on a qualifying partner/child; or otherwise very compelling circumstances). The framework is extended from "foreign criminals" to everyone liable to deportation.
The law sets a narrower starting point, but it rests on evaluative words: "disproportionate", "unduly harsh", "additional dependency beyond normal emotional ties", "very significant obstacles". What they mean in practice will be decided by the first tribunal and appeal-court rulings.
So the honest answer today is: "the bar has been raised, but by how much — we will see through the cases". Until the bill is law and the courts begin to interpret it, the exact degree of narrowing cannot be stated. We are watching and will update this page as decisions come.
What to do now
This page explains a bill — it is not legal advice. Article 8 cases are highly fact-specific, so there can be no general answers here.
- Nothing urgent — this is still a proposal; the current case law applies.
- For your own situation, see a regulated adviser: iaa.gov.uk. Free help: /lawyer.
- Keep evidence of real family ties (living together, a shared household, care) — the heart of any Article 8 case.
- We will update this page at each stage of the bill and as the first court decisions appear.
Frequently asked questions
What is Article 8?
Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is the right to respect for private and family life. People rely on it when removal or a refusal of entry would break up a family. It is not an absolute right: the state can interfere if there is a "proportionate" reason (such as the public interest).
Is this law yet?
No. The changes are in clauses 17–20 of the Immigration and Asylum Bill (introduced 30 June 2026, now at 2nd reading). The current case law still applies — nothing from the bill is in force.
What actually changes?
For the first time the bill writes into statute what "family life" is (normally only the "core" cohabiting family), and it raises the public-interest and deportation thresholds. Until now this was decided case by case under Strasbourg and UK case law, with no statutory definition.
Who now makes an Article 8 family reunion claim?
Under clause 17, a new "sponsor human rights claim" is made by the UK-based family member (the sponsor: a British citizen, settled person, or person with protection status), not the relative abroad. The sponsor gains a right of appeal against a refusal of the relative's entry. This is procedural — it does not set income or language conditions.
What is the "core cohabiting family"?
Under clause 18, family life for Article 8 is normally limited to: a spouse/civil partner/partner; children under 18 (if you are a parent); your parents (if you are under 18) — and only while you live together. With a child under 18 you do not live with, there is family life only if there is a genuine and subsisting parental relationship.
What about elderly parents, siblings, adult children?
Under clause 18, family life between adults (outside a couple) exists only if there is "an additional element of dependency beyond normal emotional ties". And these do NOT by themselves count as such dependency: financial dependence; illness (unless the person needs constant care that only this relative can provide); reliance for emotional support; living in a country affected by war or conflict. A court may still weigh these factors later, at the public-interest stage.
What about deportation?
Clause 20 raises the bar: deportation is in the public interest unless its effect would be "disproportionate". It is disproportionate only where one of three sets of "exceptional circumstances" applies (lawful residence for most of your life + integration + very significant obstacles to integrating in the destination; or an "unduly harsh" effect on a qualifying partner/child; or otherwise very compelling circumstances). The framework is extended from "foreign criminals" to everyone liable to deportation.
Why do people say "the effect will only be clear after the courts rule"?
Because the key words — "disproportionate", "unduly harsh", "additional dependency beyond normal emotional ties", "very significant obstacles" — are evaluative. Exactly how far they narrow things in practice will be settled by the first tribunal and appeal-court decisions. Until then no one can state the precise new bar.
Does it affect children?
Yes, indirectly. Clause 19 narrows the test of when it is "unreasonable to expect a child to leave the UK": now only if (a) the child would get no education in the new country, (b) there would be very significant obstacles to adapting, or (c) relocation would otherwise cause the child a very significant and long-lasting harm. It also adds: if a parent is removed and the child stays, the serious long-term harm to the child is considered.
What to do now?
Nothing urgent — this is a bill. Article 8 cases are highly fact-specific, so for your own situation see a regulated immigration adviser (check at iaa.gov.uk). We will update this page as the bill progresses and the first court decisions appear.