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 Respondents: Mr. M. Biggs of Counsel instructed by Blacjstone Law Associates.
This is an appeal against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Lambert promulgated on 4 July 2014, allowing the appeal of Ms Khaing against the Respondent�s decision dated 24 September 2013 to refuse to grant entry clearance as the spouse of Mr Arvind Kohli (�the sponsor�).
Although in the proceedings before me the Entry Clearance Officer (�ECO�) is the appellant, and Ms Khaing is the respondent, for the sake of consistency with the proceedings before the First-tier Tribunal I shall hereafter refer to Ms Khaing as the Appellant and the ECO as the Respondent.
The Appellant is a national of Myanmar born on 26 May 1985. She made an application for entry clearance as the spouse of the sponsor using an on-line application form completed on 2 July 2013. The application was refused on 24 September 2013 for reasons set out in a Notice of Immigration Decision with particular reference to the �Relationship Requirements� of Section E-ECP of Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules.
The Respondent also gave consideration to the �Financial Requirements� of Appendix FM and the associated evidential requirements under Appendix FM-SE, but made no decision in this regard � � no final determination has been made at this stage as to whether you meet the income threshold and/or related evidential requirements � � because of pending litigation. In this context, the Notice of Immigration Decision stated:
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.