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.
             To avoid confusion, the parties are referred to herein as they were before the First-tier Tribunal.
             In the circumstances, I am satisfied that it is in the interests of justice and consistent with the overriding duty to deal fairly and justly to proceed with the hearing in the appellant's absence and absence of any legal representative. In reaching that conclusion, I bear in mind that following the Court of Appeal's decision in Celik v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 921 there appears to be no viable basis to resist the respondent's appeal.
             The relevant history can be summarised as follows.
             By the decision of Upper Tribunal Judge Norton-Taylor issued on 21.10.22, the respondent has been granted permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge McKinney) promulgated 6.5.22 allowing the Albanian appellant's appeal against the respondent's decision of 11.10.21 to refuse his EUSS application made on 29.6.21.
             In essence, the First-tier Tribunal concluded that the appellant had been in a durable relationship with an EEA national prior to the specified date of 31.12.20 and that the refusal of the EUSS application was disproportionate with reference to Article 18(1)(r) of the Withdrawal Agreement (WA), which has as its purpose the facilitation and protection of the rights of EU nationals and their family members.
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.