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 other area which is an error of law and received by the Secretary of State is this was an accompanying case and on that basis, but what was not in issue was whether duty rights would be in play. There was clearly perhaps through no fault of the judge an error of law in this case in that the parties proceeded on a fundamentally mistaken basis. The result of this was that there was no proper consideration about the issue of dependency which is a matter which needs to be considered and for that reason the decision will need to be remade on that issue.
It is my view that given the history of this case and the length of time it has taken, some five years in total in a number of cases, that this should be reluctantly remitted to the First-tier Tribunal as it is likely to be heard more quickly than if retained in the Upper Tribunal.
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error of law and I set it aside.
The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh decision on the issue of dependency between the appellant and the sponsor.
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.