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 claimant is a citizen of China, born on 17 December 1968. He sought to appeal against the decision of Secretary of State for the Home Department dated 21 June 2013 refusing to issue him with a residence card as confirmation of a right of residence under European Community Law as the primary carer of an EEA national exercising treaty rights in the United Kingdom.
The Reasons for Refusal Letter dated 21 June 2013 did not take issue with the fact that the claimant was the primary carer but rather raised an objection whether or not the child qualified to be a self-sufficient person by having the necessary funds as required under the Regulations. No consideration was given to Article 8 for reasons as stated in the decision.
The claimant sought to appeal against that decision, which appeal came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Hutchinson on 8 July 2014. The Judge found that the financial requirements for the child to be self-sufficient were indeed met on the evidence provided. There has been no challenge to that finding.
The Judge, however, drew the attention of the parties to Regulation 15A(2) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 which provided that:
�(a) The appellant is the primary carer of an EEA national (the relevant EEA national) and
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.