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.
I refer to the Appellant in this appeal as the Secretary of State and to the Respondent as the Claimant. The Claimant is a Sengalese national who was born on 31 December 1986. Her application for entry clearance as the spouse of an EEA national Mr Malam Sano was refused on 27 July 2015. She appealed against that decision to the First-tier Tribunal and her appeal was allowed under Regulation 7 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 ("the EEA Regulations") by First-tier Tribunal Judge Trevaskis in a decision promulgated on 28 July 2016.
The Secretary of State sought permission to appeal against that decision and First-tier Tribunal Judge Adio granted permission to appeal on decision on 1 November 2016. Permission was granted on the grounds that there was an arguable error of law in failing to consider Portuguese law in determining the validity of the marriage.
The Secretary of State argues in the grounds seeking permission to appeal that the First-tier Tribunal failed to have regard to two Upper Tribunal decisions, namely Kareem (Proxy marriages - EU law ) [2014] UKUT 21 , and TA and Others (Kareem explained) Ghana [2014] UKUT 316 . The Secretary of State argues that the Judge ought to have considered whether the Claimant's proxy marriage was valid under Portuguese law, the country of her EEA sponsor's nationality.
I heard from Mr Diwnycz who conceded that the Secretary of State's position as set out in the grounds of appeal could not be maintained in view of the decision of the Court of Appeal in Albert Awuku v SSHD [2017] EWCA Civ 178 .
The Claimant and her EEA spouse contracted a customary marriage. The Secretary of State did not dispute the validity of that marriage and Judge Trevaskis found that the marriage met the requirements for recognition in CB (validity of marriage; proxy marriage) Brazil [2008] UKIAT 00080. The Secretary of State's case was the marriage was one of convenience. Judge Trevaskis found that the marriage was not one of convenience and was a genuine one. No issue was taken in with those findings the grounds seeking permission to appeal.
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.