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.
This is an extemporary decision and is therefore expressed in the present tense.
This is an appeal by the Secretary of State against a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge White, who decided to allow the appeal of Mrs Mudiyanselage against the refusal to grant her indefinite leave to remain and also to remove her from the United Kingdom.
By way of background, the application had originally been for further leave to remain as a work permit holder under the Immigration Rules. It is unnecessary to explain the reasons why Judge White found that she did not meet the particular requirements for leave to remain in that category. This is because Mrs Mudiyanselage (to whom I shall hereafter refer to as �the Appellant� in accordance with her status in the First-tier Tribunal) has not cross-appealed the finding that she did not meet the requirements of paragraph 134 of the Immigration Rules.
The threshold criteria for indefinite leave to remain under paragraph 276B(i) is residence for a continuous period of ten years which, by the time the matter came before Judge White, the Appellant had completed.
I now set out, because I regard it as instructive, what Judge White said about this alternative basis for remaining in the United Kingdom:-
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.