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 advancing the appeal, Mr Iqbal makes two substantive points. The first is to criticise the judge's findings in relation to "significant obstacle", submitting that they cannot be justified on the evidence; and the second is to criticise the findings in relation to the Article 8 assessment. Mr Iqbal took me to the letter dated 9 August 2016 to which I have already made reference. The letter which emanates from Dr Imran Hussain, a General Practitioner at the Small Health Medical Practice in Birmingham, reads as follows:
The thrust of Mr Iqbal's submissions is that the judge failed to give proper and adequate regard to the content of that letter. In my assessment that submission is ill-founded. The judge incorporates by reference the entirety of the content of that letter and it is neither necessary nor appropriate to recite each and every sentence. The judge clearly had very much in mind all that was said in that letter having regard to the appellant's health and physical limitations.
I can well understand that the appellant, her family and her advisors may be unhappy with what they perceive as a harsh result, but such unease does establish a material error of law.
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.