UI2023001746 & UI2023001747

             The appellants appealed the respondent's decisions dated 10 May 2021 to refuse a human rights claim in the context of an application for entry clearance as the adult child of a former Gurkha.

             The appellants applied for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The grounds make general submissions and are not particularised. The following points can be discerned:

(i)                  It was submitted that the judge failed to attach adequate weight to the letter from the Ward Chairperson, which stated that the appellants were the daughters of Mr Subba. Elsewhere in the decision he attached weight to what the Ward Chairperson said in another letter about the second appellant's disability.

(ii)                The judge applied too high a standard of proof to the issue of paternity in this appeal. It was accepted that the appellants' mother and father were married. The sponsor is named as a Gurkha's wife on the Kindred Roll. There was no dispute that the sponsor is the appellants' mother. The letter from the Ward Chairperson also supported the assertion that the appellants were the daughters of a former Gurkha.

(iii)              In the alternative, the judge erred in requiring the appellants to be biologically related in light of other evidence that still suggested a parental relationship.