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 Secretary of State appeals against the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Herbert, OBE, promulgated on 27 May 2014 allowing the appeal of Mrs Kataria against the decision made by the Secretary of State refusing her leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur). For the sake of continuity, I shall refer to Mrs Kataria as the appellant, as she was before the First-tier Tribunal.
In paragraph 15 of his determination, the Judge recited his conclusion that he found the appellant had supplied the necessary documentation in the correct format at the date of the decision. Whilst acknowledging that the respondent�s bundle did not contain a copy of the application in which section G 21 had been completed, the Judge said in paragraphs 15 and 16
I am satisfied [the form] was in existence at the date of decision and was authorised and signed by the appellant in a tick box with the occupational code set out.
This falls lamentably short of a reasoned assessment of the issues in this case.
It is not, perhaps, surprising that this occurred given the fact that the Judge did not set out what those requirements were, did not make any findings of fact as to what documents were submitted at the date of the application, what documents were considered by the decision maker, and in what way the decision maker was wrong in the 3 respects in which it was said by her the application fell short.
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.