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.
In 2002 the applicant became so desperate to come and see the sponsor, her children and grandchildren, that she travelled to the UK with a false passport. She remained in the UK from 2002 to 2007 whilst various applications for leave to remain were pending. In 2007 she was removed to Nigeria after all her appeal rights were exhausted.
On 13 September 2012 an Entry Clearance Officer in Lagos gave his reasons for refusing the appellant�s application. He refused it under paragraph 320(7A), 320(11) and paragraph 281 of the Immigration Rules. Her fingerprints had been checked against records held in the United Kingdom. A positive match confirmed that she had previously used the following names in the UK: Mary Johnson, Ajibode Elizabeth Madupe and Elizabeth Madupe Williams. But the appellant had not declared these names at section 1.3 on her Visa Application Form.
The Entry Clearance Officer was also not satisfied that the marriage between her and the sponsor was genuine and subsisting. She submitted no evidence of telephone bills, correspondence, cards or visits since February 2010.
He had also considered the application under Article 8. There was nothing to prevent her sponsor from relocating to Nigeria to enjoy family life or continuing to visit her there. While he accepted the decision constituted limited interference with Article 8, he reminded himself this was a qualified right, and he was satisfied the decision was justified and proportionate in the interests of maintaining an effective immigration control.
The appellant�s appeal came before Judge Traynor sitting in the First-tier Tribunal at Hatton Cross on 14 February 2014. Mr Adbayo appeared on behalf of the appellant, and Mr Graham, Counsel, appeared on behalf of the respondent. The appellant�s husband, her son Tony Atkins and her daughter Olayemi Olubunmi adopted their witness statements as their evidence-in-chief. They were not cross-examined. The judge also took into account an unsigned witness statement from the appellant dated 13 February 2014.
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.