OA120552013

The appellant in this case is a Thai national. She began a relationship with the sponsor, who is a British national, and they had a child together, Felix Jack Thorn, date of birth 18 June 2013, who, by virtue of his father�s British nationality, is a British citizen.

The appellant applied for entry clearance to the UK as the partner of the UK sponsor and that was considered by the Entry Clearance Officer in Bangkok but he refused the application for various reasons. There were concerns about the relationship between the sponsor and the appellant but the ECO was also not satisfied that the financial requirements of the Immigration Rules and specifically Appendix FM paragraph E-ECP.1.1 were met. Therefore on the balance of probabilities he concluded that this was not an application which ought to succeed under the Immigration Rules.

The appellant subsequently appealed against that decision and that appeal came before Immigration Judge Majid sitting at Taylor House on 24 September 2014. Both parties were represented at that hearing. According to Mr Wray, the Immigration Judge found the sponsor to be a credible witness but there does not appear to be any clear finding of credibility anywhere in the determination that I can find and Mr Wray did not refer me to any particular passage.

It seems to have been accepted by the parties before the First-tier Tribunal that the case could not succeed under the Immigration Rules and that was why the Immigration Judge went on to deal with Article 8.

The respondent�s grounds of appeal dated 6 October 2014 have been settled by D Neale. In those grounds the respondent properly summarises the test in Article 8 cases to be: whether there are compelling circumstances not recognised by the Immigration Rules for allowing the case under Article 8? It has also been said that there must be insurmountable obstacles to family life not continuing abroad in order for the case to succeed under Article 8 in circumstances where it cannot succeed under the Rules.