OA150542014

No anonymity order was made by the First-tier Tribunal. I find that no particular issues arise on the facts of this case that give rise to the need for a direction. For this reason no anonymity direction is made.

This is an appeal by the Entry Clearance Officer ("ECO"). For ease of reference, I refer below to the parties as they were in the First-Tier Tribunal albeit that the ECO is technically the Appellant in this particular appeal. The ECO appeals against a decision of First-Tier Tribunal Judge Majid promulgated on 14 September 2015 ("the Decision") allowing the Appellant's appeal against the ECO's decision dated 28 October 2014 refusing her entry clearance as a spouse under paragraph EC-P.1.1(d) of Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules ("the Rules").

Permission to appeal the Decision was granted by First-tier Tribunal Judge Astle on 19 January 2016 on the basis that the Judge failed to make findings as to how the Appellant met the Rules when she had failed to provide the evidence specified by the Rules and also on the basis that there is no clear finding or reasoning as to Article 8 ECHR. The matter comes before me to decide whether the Judge made an error of law in the Decision.

Ms Everett submitted that if I were to find an error of law, I should remit the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal given the lack of factual findings in the Decision. She accepted that the finding that the relationship between the Appellant and Mr Mohammed is genuine should in that event be preserved.

I set out below the relevant part of Appendix FM as it stood both at the date of the hearing before the Judge and now.