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 : Ms J Norman, counsel (instructed by Immigration Advice Service (Hounslow)
For the sake of convenience I shall refer to the appellant as the secretary of state and the respondents as �the claimants.�
The claimants are nationals of Jamaica, born on 3 rd May 1988 and 12 th July 1993 respectively. They are sisters. Their applications for a variation of leave to remain were refused by the secretary of state on 29 th November 2013 as she was not satisfied that they met the requirements �of the Article 8 rules�.
In a determination promulgated on 22 nd July 2013, the First-tier Tribunal Judge allowed their appeals both under the Immigration Rules and on human rights grounds.
On 12 th August 2014, First-tier Tribunal Judge R A Cox granted the secretary of state permission to appeal. He noted that their appeals were against the secretary of state's decision to refuse to vary leave to remain on family and private life grounds, and to remove them under s.47 of the 2006 Act.
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.