Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
These are the appellants� appeals against the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Parkes promulgated on 9.7.14, dismissing their linked appeals against the decisions of the respondent, dated 2.12.13, to refuse their applications made on 15.11.13 for entry clearance to the United Kingdom as the dependants (wife and 3 children) of a Tier 2 migrant. The Judge heard the appeal on 20.6.14.
Judge Parkes found most of the documentary evidence relied on by the appellants to be unreliable and unsatisfactory. At �25 the judge reached the conclusion that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that the relationship between the first appellant and the sponsor was subsisting, citing a lack of evidence of regular contact or financial support. The judge also noted that the appellants did not meet the maintenance requirements of the immigration rules. The appeals were therefore dismissed.
The grounds of application for permission to appeal challenge the manner in which the judge conducted the appeal proceedings in the First-tier Tribunal. However, in the absence of adequate and admissible evidence, that ground is not made out.
The grounds allege an error of law on the basis that the judge addressed issues of maintenance and accommodation requirements of the Immigration Rules in the absence of those matters having been raised as issues in the refusal decisions.
The grounds also allege that that the reliance on maintenance and accommodate issue infected the examination of the evidence as to the subsistence of the marriage between the first appellant and the sponsor.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.