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.
Mrs Akhtar whom I shall refer to as the claimant sought permission to enter the United Kingdom as a visitor to stay with a cousin and the application was made on the basis that she met the requirements of paragraph 41 of the Immigration Rules.
The respondent refused to grant entry clearance for reasons set out in a notice which was served on the claimant. The reasons for that are summarised by Judge Wellesley-Cole in her determination and are not in dispute. Judge Wellesley-Cole considered the application and having heard evidence from the sponsor concluded that the applicant met the requirements of paragraph 41 of the Immigration Rules.
On 21 October 2014 First-tier Tribunal Judge Nicholson granted permission stating that the grounds are clearly arguable. There is no response pursuant to Rule 24 from the respondent in this case.
When the matter came before me as noted above there was no appearance from the claimant. Mr Melvin submitted that Judge Wellesley-Cole had made a clear error of law in proceeding pursuant to consideration of the Immigration Rules and failing to have regard to the only permissible grounds of appeal that is race relations and human rights.
As was stated in Sun Myung Moon (Human rights, entry clearance, proportionality) USA [2005] UKIAT 00112 at [68]:
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.