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.
Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the appellant and members of his family are granted anonymity.
No-one shall publish or reveal any information, including the name or address of the appellant, likely to lead members of the public to identify the appellant or members of his family. Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court .
             The appellant appeals, with permission granted by Judge Saffer, the decision of Judge Russell promulgated on 3 February 2024 dismissing the appellant's appeal against the respondent's refusal of 18 January 2023 of the appellant's application for entry clearance for family reunion with his father made on 22 October 2021.
             I consider Judge Russell clearly appreciated the circumstances. He had all the papers [6], which included detailed explanation from Mr L about the cultural norms (see document G in particular). He accepted that despite the limited contact, there was family life albeit limited between the appellant and sponsor [23], [26].
             There is therefore no error of law in the judge's conclusions as to family reunion.
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.