UI2024001110

              In a decision issued on 15 May 2024 I set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal. The appeal came before me to be remade.

              I heard oral evidence from the appellant. Both representatives made oral submissions. I reserved my decision.

              I have taken into account the documents in the appellant's Upper Tribunal bundle (231 pages, in three parts, "AB"), and the respondent's bundle prepared for the First-tier Tribunal (67 pages, "RB"). I have also taken into account the transcript of the appellant's interview with the respondent on 15 December 2022.

              The agreed issues before me were whether the appellant met the requirements of the immigration rules in relation to his family and private life, and then more widely under Article 8. In relation to family life, the issue was whether he had a genuine and subsisting relationship with his children. In relation to private life, the appellant has been in the United Kingdom for over 20 years as at the date of the hearing.

              The burden of proof lies on the appellant to show that the respondent's decision is a breach of his rights, and/or those of his children, to a family and private life under Article 8 ECHR.  The standard of proof is the balance of probabilities.  However where an application is refused with reference to the suitability requirements, the burden lies on the respondent to show that the application should have been refused on this basis.