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.
The Appellants appealed and the appeals came before Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Lodge sitting at Birmingham on 19 th October 2017. In a decision and reasons promulgated on 25 th October 2017 their appeals were dismissed.
It is on that basis that the appeal comes before me to determine whether or not there is a material error of law in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal Judge. The Appellants appear by their instructed Counsel, Mr Dhanji. The Secretary of State appears by her Home Office Presenting Officer, Mr Clarke. The First-tier Tribunal Judge made an anonymity direction. No application is made to vary that order and it remains in place.
Mr Dhanji starts by reminding me that the first Appellant is the mother of the second Appellant and the application was based on the fact that the Appellants and importantly the second Appellant had accumulated over seven years' continuous residence in the UK and therefore the second Appellant was a "qualifying child".
He then takes me to the reasoning of the judge. He recites the issues that the judge has considered
• paragraph 13, the father figure. The judge, he contends, was correct to give little weight to him in his absence;
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.