IA177762013

At the resumed hearing I heard evidence from three witnesses including the appellant, her husband Gary Cornell and his brother Gordon Cornell. I found the witnesses to be entirely credible and they gave consistent evidence as to the material issues. Documentary evidence was adduced in the form of a contract of employment for Gary Cornell , a medical note and prescription for Gordon Cornell.

The details of the evidence and submissions are set out in the record of proceedings which I have taken into account in reaching my decision.

I have referred to Sabir( AppendixFM � EX.1 not free standing) [2014] UKUT 63 (IAC), Gulshan (Article 8 � new rules - correct approach) [2013] UKUT 640 (IAC , MF(Nigeria) and Nagre . The latter make clear that Article 8 is incorporated into the rules as a complete code as reiterated in Sabir .

I find that the appellant is in a genuine and subsisting relationship with Gary who is a British citizen . I find that the appellant met all the requirements of the Rules save for the financial requirements. I find that she is now unemployed and that Gary is in employment earning an income of �17,000, close to the threshold of �18,600.

The respondent�s guidance (Section FM 1.0 October 2013 IDI (�partner and ECHR Article 8 guidance�) states that where an applicant fails to meet the immigration rules requirements for finance and English language, the SSHD must go on to consider EX.1, if applicable. It is accepted that Ex.1 is applicable in this instance as the appellant meets EX1(b). Mr Walker conceded that in the long term there would be unjustifiably harsh consequences for the family and private lives.