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.
I see no need for and do not make any order restraining publication of the details of this case.
The appellants are citizens of India and are married to each other. The first appellant was born on 9 January 1958 and so is now 57 years old. Her husband was born on 23 November 1953 and so is now 61 years old.
They appeal with leave decisions of the First-tier Tribunal to dismiss their appeals against decisions of the respondent to refuse them entry clearance to join their son and other relatives in the United Kingdom because they could not care for themselves in India. In each case the refusal was under paragraph E-ECDR.2.5 of Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules. This provides that:
�The applicant or, if the applicant and their partner are the sponsor�s parents or grandparents, the applicant�s partner, must be unable, even with the practical and financial help of the sponsor, to obtain the required level of care in the country where they are living, because �
(a) it is not available and there is no person in that country who can reasonably provide it; or
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.