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 appeals, with permission, against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Beg ("the Judge"), dismissing her appeal against the respondent's decision to refuse her application for a family permit under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS).
             In her decision the Judge identified the determinative issue as "whether the appellant is dependent upon the EEA national sponsor to meet her essential living needs" [6]. She cited Reyes v Sweden [2015] EUECJ C-423/12 [8]-[9] and Lim [2015] EWCA Civ 1383 [41]. She heard oral evidence from the appellant's daughter in law/sponsor IEM , the appellant's son Mr J, his brother Mr M and his sister AK. The Judge found the witnesses to be lacking in credibility.
             The Judge made the following findings:-
             The Judge's assessment of credibility was affected by her observation recorded at [16] that she had concerns that the appellant's sons had entered into marriages of convenience.
             Permission was granted by UTJ Reeds on 3 November 2023 who found it arguable that the Judge had undertaken an assessment not previously raised and the appellant was not in a position to counter it and in circumstances where there was no evidential basis to support the finding.
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.