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 Respondent appeals to the Upper Tribunal, with permission, against the determination of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Higgins) promulgated on 6 th February 2014 by which it allowed the Appellant�s appeal against the Secretary of State�s decision to refuse him leave to remain as Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant.
Although the Secretary of State is the Appellant before the Upper Tribunal, I will continue to refer to her as the Respondent and Mr Shahzad as the Appellant for the sake of clarity and continuity.
The Appellant had entered the UK on 25 th February 2006 as a student and that leave was subsequently extended as a Tier 4 (General) Student Migrant and then as a Tier 1 (Post Study Work) Migrant.
As pointed out by the First-tier Tribunal Judge in paragraph 7 - 11 of his determination the Secretary of State refused the application for four reasons. The first was that he had not produced the requisite documents to show that he was registered as a director of the company on a date within 3 months prior to the application.
The second was that his occupation as �Business Consultant� was not a job listed in Appendix J.
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.