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 is the mother of the sponsor and appeals against the First-tier Tribunal decision dismissing her appeal against the respondent's decision on 29 November 2017, maintained following administrative review on 9 March 2018, to refuse her application for an EEA residence card pursuant to Regulation 7(1)(c) of the EEA Regulations 2016.
The sponsor and his siblings, all of whom are in the United Kingdom exercising treaty rights, are all Portuguese citizens, the sponsor having become a Portuguese citizen in 2014 and moved here almost immediately. The sponsor's evidence to the First-tier Tribunal was that he had been supporting his mother emotionally and financially since he was 14 years old in 1997 when his father died and that until he moved to the United Kingdom he and his siblings had continued to live in his mother's and father's family home, where she still lives.
At paragraph 10 of the decision the judge found the sponsor to be "an open witness, who had a genuine wish for the appellant to join him and his siblings in the United Kingdom". Nowhere in the decision does the judge find that there is any hint of lack of credibility in the evidence of the sponsor. At paragraph 13 the judge accepted that the sponsor had provided financial assistance to the appellant since he arrived in the United Kingdom in 2014 and at paragraph 16 she accepted that there was documentary evidence of that financial assistance over a number of years.
At paragraph 17 the judge accepted that the sponsor had given evidence that the appellant had been financially dependent on him for over twenty years and at paragraph 18 that he sent money to pay for food, household expenses and medical bills and, at paragraph 22, additional money if the appellant needed to attend family weddings and buy clothes and presents. It is not suggested anywhere in the First-tier Tribunal decision or indeed in the application to the Entry Clearance Officer that the appellant has ever been employed or that she has any financial resources of her own.
At paragraph 25, having set out the dependency test at paragraph 24, the judge says this:
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.