An American woman who lives with her boyfriend and his wife has avoided deportation after claiming that their pagan beliefs forbid divorce.
Emily DiSanto was originally told that on the grounds of public morality which ban polygamous relationships, she would not be granted a Visa to stay in the UK.
But appealing on the grounds of her right to family life, she has won her case under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Miss DiSanto shares the home of Alan and Anne-Marie Caulfield in Eltham, South East London – and both women have a child by Mr Caulfield.
In what is an extraordinary outcome, Miss DiSanto’s lawyer highlighted that by his client being deported, it would not only affect the well-being of her own son, but also Mrs Caulfield’s son.
The case will no doubt increase pressure on the government to reform human rights laws, as yet again they have been used to overturn civil servants’ decisions.
All three worship Norse gods, including Odin and Thor, and claim that their beliefs rule out a divorce between Mr and Mrs Caulfield, who according to DiSanto’s lawyer, no longer have a sexual relationship.
The Home Office dropped its objection on the grounds of bigamy, and Miss DiSanto made two appeals.
It is thought her success was largely down to the fact that civil servants could not prove that Miss DiSanto was involved in polygamy.
Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph, Ian Macdonald, QC, president of the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association said: “There is no law against threesomes. For many people such a thing may be morally objectionable but it is not unlawful.
“I think the original decision to cite polygamy as a reason to refuse permission was probably that of a junior official which, further up the chain, was recognised to be unsustainable. It would have been kicked out by any court.
After losing a first appeal, which the Government took into account that Miss DiSanto, from Chicago, arrived in Britain in 2008 already pregnant with Caulfield’s baby, casting doubt on any intentions to leave in time, DiSanto made a second appeal.
Here her lawyers highlighted that family life would be hugely disrupted by Miss DiSanto being deported, and Upper Tribunal Judges Bernard Dawson and Catriona Jarvis found favour in her argument.
A Home Office Spokesman told the Sunday Telegraph: “We are disappointed by the court’s decision in this case.
“For too long Article 8 has been used to place the family rights of immigration offenders above the rights of the British public.
“This is why we will change the immigration rules to reinforce the public interest in seeing those who have breached our immigration laws removed from this country.”
The Caulfields and Miss DiSanto have declined to comment on the court’s decision.
