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 claimant in this case is a citizen of Sri Lanka born on 24 th April 1980. She applied for leave to enter the United Kingdom as the spouse of the sponsor in an application dated 24 th December 2012. That application was refused by a decision dated 20 th March 2013 and upheld by the Entry Clearance Manager on 29 th October 2013.
The claimant sought to appeal against that decision, which appeal came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Shamash on 19 th May 2014. The appeal was allowed both in respect of the Immigration Rules and in respect of Article 8 of the ECHR.
The Entry Clearance Officer sought to appeal against that decision on the basis that the documentation submitted by the appellant in support of the maintenance requirements did not meet the specific Rules and also that the guidance in Gulshan was not applied in respect of Article 8.
Permission to appeal was granted and thus the matter came before me for determination.
In many ways this is an unfortunate situation because, as the First-tier Tribunal Judge indicated in the determination, there is little challenge to the fact that the sponsor was earning the requisite funds at the time of the application and subsequently. Numerous documents were produced showing the finances of the sponsor.
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.