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.
For the Respondent: Ms A Brocklesby-Weller Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
I have considered whether any parties require the protection of an anonymity direction. No anonymity direction was made previously in respect of this Appellant. Having considered all the circumstances and evidence I do not consider it necessary to make an anonymity direction.
The Appellant, a national of India, was born on 1 February 1984. The Appellant appealed against the decision of the Secretary of State dated 16 April 2013 to refuse to grant an application for entry clearance as a family visitor in order to spend 4 months with her sister. First-tier Tribunal Judge dismissed the appeal and the Appellant now appeals with permission to this Tribunal.
The relevant paragraphs of Paragraph 41 of the Rules for the purposes of this appeal provide that the applicant:
�(i) is genuinely seeking entry as a general visitor for a limited period as stated by him, not exceeding 6 months or not exceeding 12 months in the case of a person seeking entry to accompany an academic visitor, provided in the latter case the visitor accompanying the academic visitor has entry clearance; and
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.