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 Appellant: Ms Lara Simak of Counsel, instructed by PSA McKenzie Solicitors
      The appellant appeals with permission from the decision of the First-tier Tribunal dismissing her appeal against the respondent's decision on 30 September 2021 to refuse her application for entry clearance as the family member of an EEA national, pursuant to the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) and Appendix EU (Family Permit) to the Immigration Rules HC 395 (as amended).
      The appellant is a citizen of India, born on 26 September 1992. She is 31 years old now. Her sponsor is her mother, Mrs Ramibai Natu, on whom she claims to be financially and emotionally dependent. Mrs Natu is a relevant EEA citizen for the purposes of Appendix EU and the EUSS.
      Mode of hearing. The hearing today took place face to face. A Gujarati interpreter was available for all of the appellant's witnesses. There were some difficulties but nothing of substance. At the end of the hearing, Ms Simak confirmed that she was satisfied with the interpreter and did not wish to raise any concerns.
      For the reasons set out in this decision, I have come to the conclusion that the appellant's appeal must be dismissed.
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.