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.
On 12 July 2011 the appellant applied to enter the UK as a fianc� (i.e. with a view to marriage and permanent settlement in the UK) in terms of paragraph 290 of the Immigration Rules.
The respondent refused that application by notice dated 13 September 2012, not being satisfied in terms of paragraph 290 (iv) and (vi) that adequate maintenance and accommodation without recourse to public funds would be available to the appellant until the date of the marriage, nor that the parties would be able, after the marriage, to maintain themselves and dependants adequately without recourse to public funds.
First-tier Tribunal Judge Reid allowed the appeal by determination promulgated on 23 January 2014, under paragraph 290 of the Immigration Rules 290 and under Article 8 of ECHR.
(a) The judge concludes that the appellant has satisfied the Immigration Rules on the basis of the evidence provided at appeal � the evidence at the date of the [Entry Clearance Officer�s] decision was inadequate and the judge should have considered the appeal on that basis.
(b) Furthermore the findings in respect of Article 8 do not establish exceptional circumstances and do not establish that it would be unreasonable to expect the appellant to comply with the conditions of a firm and coherent system of immigration control by making a fresh application with sufficient evidence of his ability to satisfy the Rules.
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.