IA184942014 & IA183332014

The second appellant, a citizen of Pakistan, entered the UK as a student in April 2011. He did not study, which he says was due to a dispute with his college over fees. He overstayed. His first contact with the respondent after arrival was by letter dated 11 April 2014 from Drummond Miller (then acting for both appellants). The letter advised that he and the first appellant, a citizen of Lithuania, had been in a relationship since February 2013, had resided together since 6 April 2014, and planned to marry on 17 April 2014. They offered to be interviewed in advance of the wedding.

The appellants were interviewed by Immigration Officers on 17 April 2014, following which the marriage did not proceed, and immigration decisions were made against both appellants. Judge Doyle dismissed their appeals to the First-tier Tribunal by determination promulgated on 19 August 2014.

The following points are common ground: the appeals turn on the Judge�s finding that the proposed marriage was of the nature of a marriage of convenience; there is a distinction between living at the same address and marital, or quasi-marital, cohabitation; and if the Judge�s finding on the nature of the marriage is legally unsustainable, the outcome should be a remit to the First-tier Tribunal.

On 29 September 2014 First-tier Tribunal Judge McDade granted permission to appeal, thinking it �arguable that the Judge gave inappropriate weight to inconsistencies that were mainly evident during interviews in arguably stressful circumstances and without an interpreter.�

In a Rule 24 response to the grant of permission the respondent says that the grounds are only disagreement and that the Judge came to his conclusion having considered all the evidence.