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.
This is an appeal against the determination promulgated on 2 October 2014 of First-tier Tribunal Judge Tully which refused the appeal against the respondent�s decision dated 3 August 2014 to refuse entry clearance as a spouse.
It was common ground before me that this appeal turns around a single document, that being an original bank statement for July 2013 for the sponsor.
It was therefore the position at the date of the application and the decision and the ECO review that no July 2013 bank statement, whether copy or original, was before the ECO at the relevant time.
It is also common ground that by the time of the hearing before Judge Tully, the sponsor had provided a copy of the July 2013 bank statement but not an original as required by Appendix FM-SE. As Judge Tully indicated at [22], it was conceded for the appellant that �the original documents in the form of payslips or bank statements for the relevant period� were not before her. She found, correctly, in my view, that the requirements of Appendix FM-SE could not be met where the original bank statement had not been provided to the ECO.
Nothing in the determination shows that it was argued before the First-tier Tribunal that the sponsor had, in fact, sent an original or a copy of the July 2013 bank statement to the respondent.
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.