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 in this appeal before me is the Secretary of State for the Home Department ("SSHD") and the respondent to this appeal is FR . However, for ease of reference, in the course of this decision I adopt the parties' status as it was before the FtT.  I refer to FR as the appellant, and the Secretary of State as the respondent.  
            The appellant is a national of the Netherlands. On 11 June 2017 the appellant arrived in the UK on a flight from Ethiopia. He was found to be in possession of Class A drugs and arrested. The appellant was convicted on 10 October 2017 at Isleworth Crown Court for the importation of Class A drugs. He received a sentence of 7 years and 3 months in prison.
            Permission to appeal was granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Macleman on 23 September 2022. He said:
"The grounds found upon the appellant's denial of any offending; unnoticed contradictions between an OASys report and the evidence at the hearing on matters tending against family being a significant protective factor; a risk assessed at 25%; and other matters said to have been overlooked, and tending against rehabilitation.
Perhaps the case might have gone either way, but the grounds qualify for debate on whether they disclose inadequacy of reasoning, rather than just a difference of opinion."
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.