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.
The Entry Clearance Officer appeals against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Maciel) allowing Saad Sonoury�s appeal against a refusal to grant him entry clearance as a visitor under para 41 of the Immigration Rules (HC 395 as amended).
For convenience, I will refer hereafter to the parties as they appeared before the First-tier Tribunal.
The appellant, together with his mother and grandmother, applied for entry clearance to visit the UK and, in particular, to visit the appellant�s aunt and her family in the UK. On 7 July 2013, the appellant and his mother and grandmother were refused entry clearance. They appealed to the First-tier Tribunal. Following a hearing, on 30 April 2014 Judge Maciel allowed each of the appellants� appeals under the Immigration Rules.
On 3 June 2014, the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Parkes) granted the ECO permission to appeal on that ground. Thus, the appeal came before me.
At the hearing, the appellant was not represented and the sponsor did not appear. Mr Richards informed me that the ECO had issued the appellant, together with his mother and grandmother, entry clearance and they were, as he understood it, already in the UK. Nevertheless, Mr Richards invited me to determine the appeal; allowing the ECO�s appeal and substituting a decision that there was no valid appeal before the First-tier Tribunal in relation to the appellant.
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.