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.
       The Appellant, a citizen of India born on 11 March 1976, appeals with permission a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Athwal ('the Judge'), promulgated on 25 July 2023, in which she dismissed his appeal against refusal of his application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom on the basis of his family life with his wife, a British citizen.
       The Judge undertakes a proportionality assessment from [17] concluding, following having undertaken the necessary balancing exercise, that the public interest in maintaining effective immigration control outweighs the individual rights of the Appellant. Removal was therefore found to be proportionate [27].
       The application for permission to appeal noted the issues before the Tribunal were (i) insurmountable obstacles pursuant to EX.1 and (ii) proportionality of interference with Article 8 ECHR rights.
   Having concluded the Appellant could not succeed under the Immigration Rules, the Judge goes on to consider Article 8 ECHR outside the Rules between [17 - 28] which I shall discuss in further detail below.
   The Appellant sought permission to appeal which was granted by another judge of the First-tier Tribunal on 3 November 2023, the operative part of the grant being in the following terms:
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.