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.
In this appeal the Appellant is referred to as the Secretary of State and the Respondent as the Claimant.
A number of problems arise from this exercise but not least the judge failed to address the evidence of a Miss Rachel Collings whose general evidence was served along with that of a Mr Peter Millington which it was intended should be read together as to establish the general principle of the likelihood being that the Claimant had allowed a third party to take the test. It may be when the full Judgment of the President's (IAC) decision (23 March 2015) is published in the case of IA/31380/2014 and another that the sustainability of the ETS voice recognition testing systems will become clearer.
It is clear that that ETS evidence can be open to significant criticism as to its sufficiency albeit an expert opinion provided by Dr Harrison of 5 February 2015 disputes over the technical evidence and the sufficiency of ETS material. It may not be as great as is sometimes thought. The Upper Tribunal, in IA/31380/2014 and another, accepted in full Dr Harrison's evidence in all material respects.
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.