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 by the Secretary of State against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal allowing the appeal of the respondent, who I will call the claimant, against the decision of the Secretary of State refusing him further leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) Migrant under the points-based system.
The Rules are perfectly plain and I have to ask myself if this is a case where, exceptionally, the ordinary requirements of the Rules should not apply, and I can see no reason why I should reach such a conclusion. Things have been said about fairness and legitimate expectation but the only legitimate expectation is a decision in accordance with the Rules at the time the application is made, which is what the claimant got. Clearly he hoped he would be allowed to stay longer but the Rules have changed and he cannot satisfy them.
I take no pleasure whatsoever in reaching this decision. I can understand from the claimant�s personal point of view that he must feel rather hard done by. I stress there is no evidence he has done anything wrong but his circumstances do not meet the requirements of the Rules. There is nothing before me which makes it a disproportionate decision to exclude him now.
I set the decision of the First-tier Tribunal and I substitute a decision dismissing the claimant�s 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.