HU017432020 & Ors [2023] UKAITUR HU017432020 (14 July 2023)

HU017432020 & Ors [2023] UKAITUR HU017432020 (14 July 2023)

The appellants satisfied the requirements of Appendix FM, including the definition of 'partner' and exemption from the English language requirement due to the first appellant's disability; thus, refusal of entry would be disproportionate under Article 8 ECHR and the appeal is allowed.

Citation
[2023] UKAITUR HU017432020
Parties
First Appellant: Samina Nasir Raja; Second Appellant: Uzaira Nasir; Third Appellant: Raja Ali Nasir; Respondent: Entry Clearance Officer
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Immigration Appeal / Remaking of Decision After First Tier Tribunal Decision Set Aside
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Entry Clearance, Appendix FM, English Language Requirement, Article 8 ECHR, Family Life, Disability Exemption
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Entry Clearance Appendix FM English Language Requirement Article 8 ECHR Family Life Disability Exemption

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samina Nasir Raja

First Appellant

Uzaira Nasir

Second Appellant

Raja Ali Nasir

Third Appellant

Entry Clearance Officer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Immigration Appeal / Remaking of Decision After First Tier Tribunal Decision Set Aside

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants meet the requirements of Appendix FM for entry clearance as partner and children
  2. 2 Whether the first appellant is exempt from the English language requirement due to disability
  3. 3 Whether refusal of entry would be a disproportionate interference with family life under Article 8 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants satisfied the requirements of Appendix FM, including the definition of 'partner' and exemption from the English language requirement due to the first appellant's disability; thus, refusal of entry would be disproportionate under Article 8 ECHR and the appeal is allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Decision of the First-tier Tribunal set aside
  • Appeal remade and allowed under Article 8 ECHR