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 (�the SSHD�) appeals against a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge D Dickinson dated 28 January 2015 in which he allowed the respondent�s (the claimant�s) appeal.
The issue before the First-tier Tribunal was whether or not the SSHD displaced the burden upon her to establish that the claimant employed deception when he took an English test on 19 November 2013.
In grounds of appeal the SSHD submitted that the Judge made findings that are materially flawed and / or unreasoned. At the hearing before me Mr Harrison simply relied upon the grounds of appeal. I deal with each in turn below.
I do not accept that the decision is insufficiently reasoned. The Judge has provided adequate reasoning for the SSHD to understand why she has lost. He did not regard the evidence relied upon to be sufficiently specific to this claimant for the reasons he provides.
The grounds amount to no more than a disagreement with the Judge�s findings and do not disclose any error of law.
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.