Ahmed v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions

Ahmed v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions

The sponsor's declaration stating 'able and willing to maintain and accommodate' does not amount to a maintenance undertaking as required by section 115(10) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; it is a statement of present fact, not a promise for the future, and thus does not exclude the claimant from income support.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Ali Ahmed; Defendant/appellant: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Maintenance Undertakings, Income Support Eligibility, Dependent Relatives Entry, Statutory Interpretation
Immigration Law Social Security Law Maintenance Undertakings Income Support Eligibility Dependent Relatives Entry Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ali Ahmed

Claimant/respondent

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a statutory declaration by a sponsor constitutes a maintenance undertaking under section 115(10) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is excluded from income support within the first five years of entry based on the existence of a maintenance undertaking

Ratio Decidendi

The sponsor's declaration stating 'able and willing to maintain and accommodate' does not amount to a maintenance undertaking as required by section 115(10) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; it is a statement of present fact, not a promise for the future, and thus does not exclude the claimant from income support.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Public funding assessment of respondent's costs
  • Respondent to have costs of appeal