EA004352017

On 21 June 2016, the appellant applied through her legal representatives for a residence card as confirmation of her right to reside in the UK. She relied on her marriage to Mr Adrian Hriban, a Romanian national, whom she had married on 14 July 2011. Evidence was produced to show that Mr Hriban was employed by a company called [ ]. On 4 January 2017, the respondent refused the appellant's application. Two reasons were given for the decision.

Firstly, the respondent considered that the appellant's marriage to Mr Hriban was a marriage of convenience and therefore fell outside the definition of family member provided for in Regulation 2 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006. The respondent relied on records of a so-called "pastoral visit" to the claimed matrimonial home in [ ] conducted by Immigration Officers on 16 August 2011. Mr Hriban was not there at the time of the visit and, after interviewing the appellant and telephoning Mr Hriban, the officers concluded that the relationship was not genuine.

Secondly, the respondent considered the appellant had failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Mr Hriban was a "qualified person" so as to fall within the definition of 'worker' in Regulation 6 of the EEA Regulations.

The appellant appealed and requested that her appeal be decided on the papers. The First-tier Tribunal upheld the decision of the respondent on both points. The appellant applied for permission to appeal raising three grounds.

Mr Ume-Ezeoke who appeared for the appellant relied on all three grounds. He submitted that paragraphs 9 and 10 of the decision contain a correct exposition of the approach to be applied but he argued that at paragraph 16 the judge did not follow that approach. In relation to the other grounds his submissions essentially followed the written grounds seeking permission to appeal.