OA120092012

This is an appeal by the Entry Clearance Officer, Lagos against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal dismissing an appeal by Mr Omoniyi against the decision made refusing him entry clearance as a dependent relative under the immigration rules but allowing the appeal under article 8. In this determination I will refer to the parties as they were before the First-tier Tribunal, Mr Omoniyi as the appellant and the Entry Clearance Officer as the respondent.

�62. The different outcomes in cases with superficially similar features emphases to us that the issue under article 8(1) is highly fact sensitive. In our judgement rather than applying a blanket rule with regard to adult children, each case should be analysed on its own facts, to decide whether or not family life exists within the meaning of article 8(1). As Wall LJ explained, in the context of family life between siblings:

I now turn to the issue of proportionality. On this issue I find that the judge did err in law. The judge set out her reasons in [25] and I am satisfied that although she referred to Huang [2007] UKHL 11 and set out that the judgment on proportionality must always involve the striking of a fair balance between the rights of the individual and the interests of the community, she then failed to carry out that balancing exercise.

�10. In Huang [2007] 2 AC 167 , para 16, the House acknowledged the need, in almost any case, to give weight to the established regime of immigration control:

In R (Mahmood) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] 1 WLR 840 , para 23, Laws LJ had recognised that