IA246042014

The Appellant is a citizen of South Africa born 16 th March 1955. She is married to John Fairchild a British citizen and they have a daughter Lisa Fairchild born June 1984 also a British citizen. Lisa Fairchild has a learning disability which, I understand, resulted from complications suffered during birth.

The Respondent maintained her decision to refuse entry and the Appellant appealed that refusal. The appeal came before the First-tier Tribunal. In a determination promulgated on 12 th September 2014 the FtT dismissed the Appellant�s appeal. The Appellant now appeals with permission to the Upper Tribunal.

Mrs Pettersen for the Respondent sought to defend the determination. She accepted that the Judge�s findings could be described as brief but said he had come to the correct decision because the Appellant was never going to be able to meet the Immigration Rules. She said the Judge had recognised that there are credibility problems for the Appellant concerning the fact that she had entered on a visit visa when it was clearly always her intention to remain here permanently.

I am satisfied that the determination of Judge Hindson contains an error such that the decision must be set aside and remade. I say this because in my judgment the determination is deficient in its reasoning on material matters concerning the Article 8 proportionality assessment. Having correctly identified and referred to the case of Gulshan, the Judge set out in his determination the following,

�Only if there are arguably good grounds for granting leave to remain outside the Rules is it necessary, for Article 8 purposes, to go on to consider whether there are compelling circumstances not sufficiently recognised under the Rules.�