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 purposes of this decision, I refer to Mr Farooq as the appellant and to the Secretary of State for the Home Department as the respondent. The second appellant is Mr Farooq�s wife. Her appeal is entirely dependent on that of her husband and, without intending to minimise the importance of this matter to her, I refer only to Mr Farooq in the determination.
The appellant, a citizen of Pakistan, born on 13 July 1980, was granted leave to enter as a Tier 4 (General) student on 16 January 2011 until 13 May 2012.
On 3 April 2012 he made an application for further leave to remain in the Tier 1 (Post Study Work) category.
That application was refused on 27 September 2012. The material reason for the refusal was that the appellant had not been awarded an eligible qualification in the 12 months prior to the date of the application. He therefore did not meet paragraph 245FD(c) or paragraph 245FD(d) of HC 395 (the Immigration Rules).
The appellant�s appeal under the Immigration Rules was allowed by First-tier Tribunal Judge Parkes in a determination dated 28 November 2012. He also allowed the appeal against the s.47 removal decision and that aspect of the decision is not under challenge here and stands; see SSHD v Ahmadi [2013] EWCA Civ 512
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.