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.
On 19 February 2013 the appellant applied for entry clearance as the spouse of a Tier 1 (Post-Study) Work Migrant. On 6 March 2013 her application was refused by an Entry Clearance Officer. She appeals against that refusal. Her appeal was itself refused by the First-tier Tribunal in a determination and reasons promulgated on 3 October 2013.
The appellant was born in Pakistan on 8 August 1987. She had an arranged marriage contracted at a distance with her husband and sponsor on 30 July 2011. A marriage ceremony was performed which both attended in person in Pakistan on 8 September 2012.
We must then consider what to do about it. We are told by the appellant�s sponsor, her husband who has appeared before us today, that she is pregnant and expects their first child towards the end of this month or early next month. His own visa will, by the end of February next year, have less than six months to run, so that under the Immigration Rules he will not be in a position to sponsor her. In those circumstances, although we could remit the matter for further hearing back to the First-tier Tribunal we propose to take the shortcut of hearing him on oath ourselves.
Accordingly, having identified an error of law in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal, having heard evidence which for obvious reasons the First-tier Tribunal was unable to hear, we are satisfied that the requirements of paragraph 319C(e) as well as 319C(d) are satisfied, and that this appeal is therefore allowed.
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.