OA018812013

This is an appeal against the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Stanford promulgated on 2 nd January 2014, following a hearing at Taylor House on 17 th December 2013. In the determination, the judge allowed the appeal of Samet Ozata. The Respondent Secretary of State applied for, and was granted, permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, and thus the matter comes before me.

The Appellant is a male, a citizen of Turkey, who was born on 23 rd February 1991. He is the husband of the Sponsor, Summeya Ozata, a person present and settled in the UK.

The Appellant�s claim is that he is entitled to join his sponsoring spouse, Summeya Ozata, in the UK because he has satisfied the requirements listed in paragraph E-ECP3.2 and can point to a gross annual income of at least �18,600 on behalf of his sponsoring wife in the UK.

The judge had regard to the fact that the Sponsor produced evidence to show that the P45 was issued in error. Letters from the Sponsor�s employer and from the accountant, who dealt with the employee�s wages explained, that this was an error and that the Sponsor was not leaving employment. She is merely taken unpaid leave. Indeed, upon resumption of work, the Sponsor continued to be paid and wage slips issued on resumption of work confirmed the earlier employment (see paragraph 23).

The judge, accordingly, concluded that the Sponsor provided evidence of her earnings in the six months before the application as required by the Rules. A P45 had been included, but this was in error, and given this fact,