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 appeal, i n light of the decisions in AS (Afghanistan) v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 1469 and Patel & others v SSHD [2013] UKSC 72 , raised issues in relation reliance upon paragraph 298 of the Immigration Rules by way of supplemental grounds in a s. 120 notice in the case of a minor who had reached her majority in the course of the proceedings.
I made directions on 7 October 2014 that the appellant must file and serve by 4 November 2014 detailed submissions as to the nature and effect of raising paragraph 298 in her statement of grounds served pursuant to s. 120 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act, 2002. (The respondent was to file and serve sequential detailed submissions by way of response.)
The appellant�s representatives took it upon themselves to assure the respondent that they would serve a belated submission by 19 January 2015. They failed to do so.
The appellant�s representatives notified the Tribunal and the respondent on 8 May 2015 that they were without instructions. (The panel was not aware of this at the hearing on 12 May 2015 until notified of the fact by Mr Wilding.)
Neither the appellant nor her representatives attended on 12 May 2015. We are satisfied that the appellant was properly served with a notice of hearing on 20 April 2015 by first class post at the address provided by her to the Tribunal.
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.