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 judge heard evidence from the appellant and his half-sister. She also had before her a significant amount of evidence relating to the care needs and the medical needs of both the appellant's mother and uncle.
The judge's findings appear in the decision from paragraph 25 onwards. In summary she accepted that the appellant cares for his mother, that her quality of life was better with him and it was with Social Services being responsible for her issues people should talk to her in her own language and that her son prepares Ghanaian food for her. She also accepted at 26 that the uncle lives with him some of the time and that the uncle's health has improved with the company and support he is receiving from the appellant.
The judge was not satisfied that the appellant met the requirements of paragraph 276ADE (vi) of the Immigration Rules, that there was no other provision of the Immigration Rules which allowed him to enter and she did not accept that it was implausible that he thought his immigration status was being sorted out. She found at [29] that he had had no intention of complying with the terms of his visit visa when he arrived, that he remained in the full knowledge that the Immigration Rules did not allow him to remain and that he deliberately overstayed.
Materially in this case the judge did not accept that the family life existed between the appellant and his mother and uncle, in particular with the mother though accepting that there were unusually strong ties in this case it was against the background where there had been no contact between the appellant from age 9 until age 42 and although accepting that the appellant is his mother's carer, she did not accept that family life existed although accepting he was acting as his mother's carer he was provided with accommodation and financial support which would not been available to him in Ghana.
The judge gave little weight to private life as it had been established whilst the appellant was here unlawfully that being an application under Section 117B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
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.