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 Respondent: Miss N Brissett, Counsel, instructed by Aden & Co Solicitors
In this decision the Respondents are referred to as the Claimants and ECO Nairobi is referred as the ECO.
The Claimants, nationals of Somalia, dates of birth 25 February 1997, 10 August 1998 and 2 October 1996, appealed against decisions of the ECO to refuse entry clearance on or about 19 November 2007 as children of a relative with limited leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom as a refugee. The applications were refused with reference to paragraph 319X of the Immigration Rules HC 395 as amended.
Their appeals came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Metzer (the judge) who dismissed their appeals under the Immigration Rules but allowed them under Article 8 of the ECHR. Permission to appeal that decision was given by First-tier Tribunal Judge Kelly in January 2015. In a decision promulgated on 20 March 2015 I found that the judge had made an error of law in that he had failed to address the public interest and also had failed to address the provisions of Section 117A and 117B of the Immigration Act 2014 as amending the NIAA 2002.
Accordingly I gave directions that the matter be remade on the Article 8 issue in the Upper Tribunal on the assessment of proportionality. I had assumed the exceptional circumstances of the separated siblings justified consideration outside the rules
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.