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 is a citizen of Nepal who was born on 17 May 1991. On 23 September 2013 she applied for entry clearance to the United Kingdom as an adult dependent relative of the widow of a Gurkha, her father, who had formerly served in the Brigade of Gurkhas. He passed away in September 1992 and, according to documentation in the file, he had served in the army for a little short of seven years, from 1963 - 1970.
The appellant�s application was refused by a decision dated 3 December 2013. The appellant appealed that decision and the appeal was heard by First-tier Tribunal Judge Boyd. In a determination promulgated on 14 October 2014 he dismissed the appeal under the Immigration Rules and under Article 8 ECHR.
The appellant sought permission to appeal that decision. Permission was granted as follows:-
�3. I am satisfied that it is arguable that there was a material error of law that could have made a material difference to the outcome for the reasons given in the application which I will not simply repeat.�
It is not in dispute that the sponsor was granted a settlement visa issued under the Secretary of State�s concession afforded to widows of former Gurkhas set out in Immigration Directorate Instructions (IDIs) Chapter 15 Section 2A, Annex B.
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.