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 the Appellant's appeal against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Wright dismissing the Appellant's appeal against the Respondent's decision to refuse the Appellant entry clearance pursuant to paragraph 297(i)(e) and (f) of the Immigration Rules and dismissing her appeal on human rights grounds under Article 8.
The Appellant is a national of Nigeria who was born on the 16 th April 1996 and who is therefore now aged 19 years old, but who was aged 17 years old as at the date of the application on the 2 nd April 2014.
On the 2 nd April 2014 the Appellant had applied for entry clearance to join her mother in the United Kingdom under paragraph 297 of the Immigration Rules. That application was refused by the Respondent on the 6 th August 2014, and the Appellant appealed by means of a notice appeal dated the 12 th September 2014.
The Appellant sought to appeal that decision to the Upper Tribunal and within the Grounds of Appeal it is argued that the Sponsor Mrs Arogundade did not receive the notice to attend the hearing and that she had made attempts to find out about the delay of the hearing date, but to no avail and that she was then shocked to receive a decision letter in the case and that she wished she had the opportunity to present her case and provide evidence such as DNA evidence to prove the relationship between her and her daughter, bank statements, birth certificates and accommodation arrangements etc.
She said that sometimes her mail does get lost in the post and that sometimes post for other people comes to her house and she produced at the hearing, an envelope, not related to this appeal, but from the post office, indicating for that piece of correspondence, it had been damaged within the post, but this was not related to the appeal and dated October 2015. Therefore I have not considered that document in reaching my decision, as it is not actually relevant to the question as to whether or not she did receive the Notice of 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.