OA193082013

The appellant�s appeal against the respondent�s refusal was allowed by Judge Aujla (�the judge�) in a determination promulgated on 20 October 2014. The grounds claimed the judge made a material error of law. The Rules of specified evidence were comprehensively set out in Appendix FM and Appendix FM-SE to the Immigration Rules. They set out what types of evidence were required, the periods they covered and the format that they should be in. The judge had no regard to those evidence requirements at [25] of the determination where he set out his findings.

The sponsor was seeking to rely on income from two different employments to demonstrate that the income threshold requirements could be met by the appellant but bearing in mind that the sponsor in respect of the employment at TRG had only started working for that company from 19 March 2013 and the appellant having made her application for entry clearance on 3 July 2013 meant that at the date of application the sponsor had not been working for TRG for the requisite six months such that the requirements of Appendix FM-SE could not be met.

Judge P J M Hollingworth granted permission to appeal on 8 December 2014. He took the view that an arguable error of law had arisen in relation to the analysis conducted by the judge appertaining to the fulfilment of the requirements of the Rules.

Mr Tufan relied upon the grounds. The appellant could not rely upon the sponsor�s employment with TRG because as of the date of the application the sponsor had not been working for that company for the requisite six months such that the requirements of Appendix FM-SE could not be met.

� there were bank statements only for nine months out of the twelve months� requisite period showing the salary being paid into the sponsor�s account.