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.
This matter is, as its file number shows, of some antiquity. There was a judicial review challenge to the Tribunal's refusal to grant permission to appeal. It is not exactly clear how the delays have arisen, but I note that there appears to have been some difficulty with service of the First-tier Tribunal's decision, so that the notice of appeal to this Tribunal followed further service in 2015.
The proceedings before the Tribunal on 24 July 2018 had been listed as for directions only. The appellant's representative had submitted detailed written submissions asking (amongst other things) for the appeal to be allowed. After hearing my views on the merits of the grounds, Mr Bramble agreed that the hearing be treated as the substantive hearing of the appeal.
The appellant's representative's written submissions seek other relief. It would be quite inappropriate to direct that the appellant be admitted to the United Kingdom: his visa has long since expired and his present circumstances are entirely unknown. There is no basis for a grant of costs as also sought by the representative.
If the appellant seeks to travel to the United Kingdom he will no doubt need to obtain entry clearance anew. Both the results of the examination at Glasgow airport (which was itself wholly lawful) on the one hand, and the fact that his appeal has been allowed on the other hand, are factors which will fall to be taken into account.
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.