IA268232013

The issue in this case is whether the judge of the First-tier Tribunal erred in concluding that there were no insurmountable obstacles to a British citizen partner of an Iranian national living with him in Iran where the parties could not otherwise meet the requirements of the Rules in force after 9 July 2012.

The appellant was born in Iran on 19 October 1987 and on 17 September 2009 entered the United Kingdom illegally claiming asylum the same day. His appeal was dismissed by an Immigration Judge of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal for reasons given in her determination dated 14 December 2009. In essence she did not believe the appellant�s claim which was based on a fear of harm from adverse interest in him for political activities.

On 3 July 2012 the appellant lodged an application for leave to remain on Article 8 grounds based on his family life with Samantha McNolty, a British citizen. The respondent refused the application for reasons given in her decision dated 12 June 2013. That refusal was in respect of the new Immigration Rules and Article 8. In essence the Secretary of State considered that there were no insurmountable obstacles to the relationship continuing in Iran.

The judge also heard evidence from Ms McNolty�s mother and her partner who spoke about their support for the relationship. He also had before him numerous other testimonials from friends including an offer of employment of Mr Heydari. The grounds of challenge to the judge�s decision which was that the Secretary of State�s decision would not breach Article 8 can be summarised as follows:

(i) In considering the practical difficulties of relocation the judge had made a number of errors based on insurmountable obstacles being clearly stated to concern the practical difficulties of relocation with reference to the decision of the Tribunal in Gulshan (Article 8 � new rules � correct approach) Pakistan [2013] UKUT 640 (IAC) .