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 appellant in these proceedings is the Entry Clearance Officer ("ECO"). However, I continue to refer to the parties as they were before the First-tier Tribunal ("FtT").
This appeal comes before me following the dismissal of the appellant's appeal to the FtT, by First-tier Tribunal Judge Iqbal ("the FtJ") against the respondent's decision dated 31 December 2013 to refuse entry clearance as a partner. That application for entry clearance was refused with reference to Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules.
It is not necessary to set out in detail the basis of the refusal by the respondent; suffice it to say that a number of issues were raised in the notice of decision.
Having considered those issues, the FtJ resolved various matters in the appellant's favour. He thus allowed the appeal under the Immigration Rules.
The Rules that governed the application for entry clearance and thus the appeal, are contained within Appendices FM and FM-SE. So far as Appendix FM is concerned the more specific requirements are contained within Section E-ECP, entitled "Eligibility for entry clearance as a partner". Where specified evidence of financial requirements is required, GEN.1.4. provides that "specified" means specified in Appendix FM-SE, unless otherwise stated.
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.