OA128962013

The Appellant is a citizen of Australia born on 1 st July 1973. He appealed against a decision made by the Respondent on 9 th May 2013 to refuse him entry clearance for settlement as the spouse of Ms Taherahe Akbar, a British citizen (�the Sponsor�) pursuant to paragraph 281 of the Immigration Rules and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights. His appeal was dismissed by Judge of the First‑tier Tribunal Bart‑Stewart sitting at Taylor House on 1 st April 2014 and the Appellant appeals with leave against that decision.

The Appellant was born in Iraq and has dual Iraqi and Australian citizenship the latter granted to him on 28 th March 2001. The Sponsor was born in Iran and came to the United Kingdom in March 2003. She was granted United Kingdom citizenship in 2012. The parties� case was that they had met in Birmingham in 2006 at a time when the Appellant was visiting his brother and family on a six month visit visa. The couple�s relationship began in 2007 and they started to live together in 2008. The Appellant went to Kurdistan to obtain medical treatment after having to leave the United Kingdom in 2009.

The Respondent refused the application principally because he was not satisfied that the Appellant and Sponsor were in a genuine and subsisting relationship. In interview the Appellant had not known the Sponsor�s address and there was no persuasive evidence of intervening devotion. In her determination the Judge placed some emphasis on this last point at paragraph 26 writing:

The Appellant�s representatives had submitted a bundle for the hearing at first instance which ran to 772 pages. I comment in more detail on that bundle below but suffice to say at this stage that at paragraph 29 the Judge rejected the idea that the documentation in the bundle supported the proposition that the Appellant and Sponsor were in a genuine relationship. At paragraph 29 she wrote:

�The Appellant�s bundle includes a number of hotel booking forms for different hotels in Greece in June 2012. Most are for one night. Although they are for two guests, they are all in the name of the Sponsor with no indication of the name of the other guest. There are a number of travel itineraries but they are not in any order and no attempt has been made by the representatives to demonstrate that the Appellant and Sponsor were in the same countries at the same time.�