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 first named appellant is a 31 year old citizen from Mongolia who was born on 12 th June, 1981. The second appellant is his wife and she is also a citizen of Mongolia, having been born on 26 th October, 1980. The third appellant is the child of the first and second appellants. He is also a citizen of Mongolia and was born on 30 th September, 2003.
In this case the appellants, who were the appellants before the First-tier Tribunal, are referred to in this determination as �the appellants� and I continue to refer to the Secretary of State as �the respondent�.
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed the appellant�s appeal. Permission to appeal was granted to the Upper Tribunal and on 31 st January, 2013 Mr Clifford Mailer, sitting as a Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge decided on the basis of the Khatel & Ors. (s85A; effect of continuing application) [2013] UKUT 44 (IAC) that the First-tier Tribunal had erred in law, that his decision should be set aside and that he should remake the decision allowing the appeal. In response to the determination of Mr Mailer, the Secretary of State applied for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
On 25 th June, 2013, the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Raju & Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 754 . In October 2013, the Upper Tribunal reported its decision in Nasim & Others (Raju: reasons not to follow) [2013] UKUT 601 (IAC). In January the Upper Tribunal reported its follow-up case of Nasim & Others (Article 8) [2014] UKUT 24 (IAC) . It will be convenient if I refer to these cases below as Nasim (1) and Nasim (2) consecutively.
� 1. It is not legally possible for the First-tier Tribunal or the Upper Tribunal to decline to follow the judgment in Raju & Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 754 on the basis that the Secretary of State�s Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) policy of July 2010 concerning the approach to be taken to �late� submission of certain educational awards continued to apply in respect of decisions taken by the Secretary of State on or after 6 th April, 2012 when the Immigration Rules were changed by abolishing the Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) route.
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.