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.
It is first necessary for me to decide if the decision of the Judge contained an error on a point of law so that it should be set aside.
At the hearing, I head submissions from both representatives which are recorded in the Record of Proceedings. As regards accommodation, Mr Jafar argued that the Judge had erred in law because evidence now available from Reading Borough Council showed that the Sponsor would be rehoused in suitable accommodation on the arrival of the Appellants in the UK.
In response, Ms Hastings argued that the Judge had not erred in law. In reaching his decision as regards accommodation, the Judge had taken account of all the documentary and oral evidence available at the hearing and relating to the date of decision which had not included the correspondence from Reading Borough Council. This had been submitted subsequent to the hearing and indeed subsequent to the promulgation of the Judge�s Determination.
The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did not involve the making of a material error on a point of law.
The First-tier Tribunal did not make an order pursuant to Rule 45(4)(i) of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005 and I find no reason to do so.
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.