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.
              At a hearing on 21 September 2023 I set aside the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Moon. The appeal came before me to be remade.
              I heard oral evidence from the appellant and from her partner, Mr. Segun Owolabi. Both representatives made oral submissions. I reserved my decision.
              The appellant is pregnant, and given her medical conditions, I asked her to let me know if she was feeling unwell or if she needed a break. She had a pause to have a drink, but then confirmed that she was feeling well enough to continue. I was content that she was able to take part fully in the hearing.
              I have taken into account the documents contained in the appellant's bundle ("AB"; 125 pages as indicated in the index, but the digital version is only 120 pages; however it was confirmed that this was the full bundle and that the pagination had gone awry). I also had the bundle prepared by the Tribunal ("HB"; 238 pages). The appellant provided a skeleton argument.
              It was agreed that the issue before me was whether or not the decision was a breach of Article 8. It was submitted that the appellant met the requirements of paragraph 276ADE(1)(vi) of the immigration rules, and that the decision was a breach of Article 8 in respect of her private and family life.
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.