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 a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Curtis ('the Judge'), promulgated on 3 October 2023, in which the Judge dismissed his appeal against the refusal of his application for a family permit under Appendix EU (Family Permit) of the Immigration Rules.
             Following consideration of the documentary and oral evidence the Judge sets out his findings of fact from [11] of the decision under challenge.
             The Judge records at [28] that it is uncontentious that the appellant and his sponsor were married by way of a proxy marriage in Kenya on 4 May 2019 according to Islamic sharia law and that the marriage was formally registered with the Registrar on 4 April 2022.
             At [38] the Judge finds that formal registration did not take place until long after the specified date of 31 December 2020 ('the specified date') and that it was not until the formal registration with the Registrar took place that the marriage was recognised under the laws of Kenya. The Judge finds prior to this it was registered under Islamic law but not the laws of Kenya.
             At [39] the Judge finds that as the marriage was not contracted until 4 April 2022, it was not before the specified date, meaning the appellant did not meet the criteria of being a family member of a relevant EEA citizen, and could not satisfy the requirements of paragraph FP 6 of the Immigration Rules, leading to the appeal being dismissed.
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.