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 appellants are Indian nationals who were born on 24 March 1985 and 13 August 1984 respectively. The first appellant is the second appellant's wife. They have a three year old daughter named Sai who is dependent upon their appeals.
              The appellants' immigration history is central to the outcome of this appeal and I must describe it in some detail. I take what follows largely from the front of the respondent's bundle before the FtT but have also been particularly assisted by the chronology attached to Mr Melvin's written submissions.
              The second appellant entered the United Kingdom lawfully in October 2008. He subsequently sought and was granted leave to remain as a student until September 2011. He then made an in-time application for leave to remain as a Tier 1 Post Study Work Migrant. That application was successful and he was granted leave to remain until August 2014.
              The first appellant entered the United Kingdom lawfully in 2012 and her immigration status has until recently been as a dependant of the second appellant's.
              The second appellant made another in time application for leave to remain in 2014 and was granted leave to remain as a Skilled General Worker, under Tier 2 of the Points Based System. His leave was valid from 9 April 2014 to 31 March 2017.
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.