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 appealed and the appeal came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Moore sitting at Taylor House on 21 st August 2013. In a determination promulgated on 6 th September 2013 the Appellant�s appeal was dismissed.
On 14 th October 2013 the Secretary of State served a Rule 24 response. That response is merely a holding document on the basis that the Secretary of State did not have the determination and therefore was unable effectively to comment.
Mr Badwy attended and gave evidence. I was taken to the confirmation of transfers from the National Westminster Bank to be found at pages 13 to 17 of the additional bundle and that those payments were made by the Sponsor to the Appellant via the National Bank of Egypt.
Mr Badwy confirmed to Mr Harrison that not only did he have a nephew in Egypt but he also had a niece who was a student aged 15 and that she does not have to pay for her education, only for her books. He further confirmed that the five payments made represent all the payments that he had made to his nephew in the past twelve months. When questioned as to how he can afford to make such payments Mr Badwy states that he has put the money aside each week and that the money was to cover the Appellant�s rent, house refurbishment and college expenses.
The appeal under the EEA Regulations 2006 is dismissed and the decision of the First-tier Tribunal is maintained.
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.