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.
For the sake of convenience I shall refer to the appellant as the �entry clearance officer� and the respondent as �the claimant.�
The claimant is a national of Pakistan, born on 14 th August 1983. His appeal against the decision of the respondent dated 22 nd February 2013 refusing his application for entry clearance as the spouse of a person present and settled in the UK was allowed under the Immigration Rules by First-tier Tribunal Judge Phull in a determination promulgated on 13 th May 2014. It had been contended on behalf of the entry clearance officer that the claimant had failed to meet the relevant financial requirements under the rules.
The Judge found that the couple had a subsisting marriage and that they intended to live together permanently [14].
With regard to the financial requirements for entry clearance, the Judge found the sponsor's evidence credible because the documents from Companies House supported her evidence that Gold Flower is a parent company and trades as Hotel Management Services. Gold Flower issues the payslips.
The Judge referred to the evidence in the claimant's bundle which included his sponsor's payslips and bank statements for the period 10 th January 2012 to 10 th January 2013. She submitted income evidence for both jobs. The Judge considered her gross and net pay from Marks and Spencer and Gold Flower, the latter from 30 th May 2012 to 20 th October 2012.
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.