IA000542015

For the Respondent: Ms C Querton of Counsel instructed by Rashid & Rashid Solicitors (Merton High St)

The appellant (hereafter the SSHD) challenges the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Manyarara dated 4 August 2015 allowing the appeal of the respondent (hereafter the claimant) on Article 8 grounds. The judge did not accept that the claimant met the Immigration Rules relating to private life but was satisfied he met the relevant rules set out in Appendix FM. The judge also considered the claimant was entitled in any event to succeed outside the Rules.

Taking the last ground first, I see no force in the SSHD's contention that the judge had wrongly taken the claimant's oral evidence at its highest. It is clear from [30], read in conjunction with [12]-[20] of the judge's decision that he considered whether certain inconsistencies in the evidence undermined the claimant's and partner's account and properly concluded that they did not, given that there was consistency on core matters relating to the nature and intensity of the family unit which was substantiated by documents that had been put before the judge.

Nor do I consider that the SSHD's other grounds identify any material legal error on the part of the judge.

In any event, I am satisfied that the judge was entitled to find that: (i) the claimant's wife met the definition of partner under GEN.1.2 of Appendix FM; (ii) that the claimant and his wife are both in the UK; (iii) that the claimant did not fall for refusal under Section S-LTR; and (iv) that on the facts of this case the claimant met the requirements of E-LTRP.1.1 and E-LTRP.2.2-2.4, as well as EX.1.