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.
This is the Secretary of State's appeal against the decision of Judge Bagral made following a hearing at Bradford on 24 th October 2014.
The claimant is a national of Pakistan born on 1 st January 1987. He entered the UK as a student on 7 th May 2011 valid to 27 th August 2012 and was subsequently granted further leave to remain in the same capacity until 6 th April 2014. On 18 th December 2013 he married a British citizen and applied for further leave to remain as a spouse.
The claimant denies using a proxy. He confirmed that he had not committed deception at the time of his Tier 4 extension application and he undertook the English language test himself. At no time had he been informed by the institution of his studies that his English language certificate was not accepted. Nor had he been informed in writing by ETS or interviewed by them or by the police.
In a detailed and thoughtful determination the judge concluded that the Secretary of State had failed to discharge the onus upon her to establish that the claimant had perpetrated a deception.
�After much consideration I am not satisfied that the evidence as presented is sufficient in probative value and has the cogency required in order to discharge the onerous burden on the respondent to prove fraud. I have reached this conclusion for the reasons set out below:
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.