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 appellant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against a decision of the Secretary of State of 22 December 2016 refusing his application for a residence card and confirmation of a right to reside in the United Kingdom with his claimed spouse Agnes Orsos, a Hungarian national.
The refusal letter referred to a large number of inconsistent and conflicting answers arising from a marriage interview that took place in December 2013 with the appellant and with the sponsor.
He was asked about the discrepancies recorded at the interview and said he forgot things and as regards the exchange of rings he said the sponsor was confused between engagement and wedding rings and as to whether he bought the ring or they bought the rings together. He said he meant he saw an engagement ring when he was going through a shopping centre.
His brother gave evidence saying that he first met the sponsor in 2012 and was present at their wedding, in fact he was the best man, and the marriage was genuine and subsisting.
There is a reference at paragraph 12 in the summary of the appellant's representative's submissions to the onus being on the appellant to show this was a marriage of convenience. That is a matter to which I shall need to return subsequently.
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.