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.
The Respondent before the Upper Tribunal was the Appellant before the First-tier Tribunal. I will refer to her as the Claimant.
The Entry Clearance Officer (ECO) appeals against a determination of Judge of the First-tier Tribunal S J Pacey (the judge) promulgated on 24 th March 2014.
The Claimant is a female citizen of Bangladesh born 8 th August 1986 who applied for entry clearance to the United Kingdom to enable her to settle as the spouse of Mohammed Kobirul Islam (the Sponsor) who is settled in the United Kingdom.
The application was refused on 2 nd October 2012. Because the application had been made prior to the amendment of the Immigration Rules on 9 th July 2012, the application was considered with reference to paragraph 281 of the Immigration Rules.
The ECO did not accept that it had been proved that adequate accommodation or maintenance would be available for the Appellant and the application was therefore refused with reference to paragraph 281(iv) and (v). The ECO considered that refusal of entry clearance would not breach Article 8 of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (the 1950 Convention).
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.