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: Miss V Akintola, Legal Representative, Harrison Morgan Solicitors
The Appellant, a national of Nigeria, date of birth 3 June 1994, appealed against the Respondent's decision, dated 26 February 2013, to refuse entry clearance with reference to paragraph 297 of the Immigration Rules HC 395.
The appeal together with appeals by a sibling (Edwin) and his mother (Emily), came before First-tier Tribunal Judge S Russell (the judge) who, on 3 April 2014, dismissed the Appellant's appeal under the Immigration Rules and, although the matter was disputed, also under Article 8 of the ECHR.
Permission to appeal that decision [D] was first refused by First-tier Tribunal Judge McCarthy on 5 September 2014 but allowed by Upper Tribunal Judge Coker on 29 January 2015.
In her opening submissions Miss Akintola accepted that the judge had made a finding on the Appellant's failure to meet the requirements of paragraph 297(ii) of the Immigration Rules. It is correct that [D23] the judge concluded that the second Appellant (this Appellant) was, at the date of application, over the age of 18 and therefore could not succeed under paragraph 297 of the Rules. It followed that grounds1-3 do not disclose any arguable error of law. In any event the fact that this Appellant had previously applied, when under 18 years of age, was immaterial.
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.