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.
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.
This is an appeal by the Appellant against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Hodgkinson promulgated on 29 August 2014 which dismissed the Appellant�s appeal on all grounds.
The Appellant are a mother and son born on 24 December 1980 and 24 May 2012 respectively and are citizens of Sri Lanka.
On 26 June 2013 the Secretary of State refused the Appellants application for entry clearance as the spouse and child of Mr Thilaimpalam Uruthirasikami, the child�s application being refused in line with that of his mother and therefore I will refer to �the Appellant �in the remainder of this decision meaning the first Appellant . The refusal letter gave a number of reasons:
(a) The Appellant did not meet the suitability requirements of Appendix FM as she failed to provide satisfactory evidence of her identity.
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.