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.
It is more convenient to refer to the parties as they were before the First-tier Tribunal. From now on I shall refer to Ms Blessing Onanghinor and Ms Beauty Onaghinor as �the appellants� and to the Entry Clearance Officer as �the respondent�.
The parties were in agreement that the judge�s decision contains a material error of law such that it should be set aside.
The respondent sought and was granted permission to appeal against Judge Abebrese�s decision in respect of the appellants on the ground that he failed to recognise that the grounds of appeal were restricted to human rights and discrimination. It clearly noted on the notices of decision that the grounds of appeal were restricted.
By virtue of section 52 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, where applications are made for visit visas after 25 June 2013, the applicants will only be able to appeal on human rights and discrimination grounds.
It is plain that Judge Abebrese did not direct himself correctly and he failed to recognise that he had no jurisdiction to allow the appellants� appeals under the rules. He made no reference at all to human rights or, for that matter, race discrimination. He exceeded his jurisdiction and I therefore set aside his decision.
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.