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.
This is an appeal against the determination dated 8 November 2013 of First-tier Tribunal Judge Ford which allowed appellant�s appeal against the respondent�s decision to refuse entry clearance as a spouse.
For the purposes of this appeal I refer to the Entry Clearance Officer as the respondent and to Mr Abbas as the appellant, reflecting their positions before the First-tier Tribunal.
The respondent maintains that Judge Ford erred at [30] in finding that the provisions of paragraph 281 (i) (b) (iii) of the Immigration Rules were not in force at the date of the decision and that the appeal should have been refused as the appellant could not meet this requirement of the Rules.
(b)(iii) the applicant does not have one or more unspent convictions within the meaning of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
It is not disputed that the appellant has unspent convictions that would mean that he could not meet paragraph 281 (i) (b) (iii) were it applicable to his appeal.
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.