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 against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Row promulgated on 5 August 2022 ("the Decision") dismissing his appeal against the Respondent's decision dated 29 March 2021 refusing him an EEA Family Permit as the extended family member of an EEA national exercising Treaty rights in the UK under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 ("the EEA Regulations"). The EEA (Dutch) national concerned is claimed to be the Appellant's cousin ("the Sponsor").
      The Respondent refused the Appellant's application on the basis that he was not satisfied that the Appellant was related to the Sponsor as claimed and was not satisfied that he was dependent on him.
      The hearing proceeded on the papers. The Appellant, Sponsor and Respondent were not represented. The Judge therefore had to do his best to ascertain what the evidence was intended to show. There was some confusion surrounding the evidence which had been filed but we accept that the Judge did have evidence apparently filed after the appeal which was before the Judge. The Judge found however that the evidence did not establish that the Appellant and Sponsor were related as claimed. He therefore dismissed the appeal. He made no findings in relation to dependency.
      The Appellant via the Sponsor challenged the Decision on the basis that the documents, properly understood, did provide sufficient evidence to support his case both as to relationship and dependency. He said in relation to the family documents that the Judge could have verified that the document showed what he said it might show using the website given and the QR code and password. The grounds also sought to explain why some entries on the bank statement did not clearly show that the funds emanated from the Sponsor.
      The application for permission to appeal was out of time but time was extended by First-tier Tribunal Judge S Aziz. However, by a decision dated 25 November 2022, he refused permission for the following reasons:
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.