UI2022006552 [2024] UKAITUR UI2022006552 (10 July 2024)

UI2022006552 [2024] UKAITUR UI2022006552 (10 July 2024)

The appellant met the requirements of GEN.3.1 because refusal of entry clearance could result in unjustifiably harsh consequences, and the financial requirement was satisfied through a credible guarantee of sustainable financial support from his son. The threshold under GEN.3.1(1)(b) is possibility, not likelihood,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] UKAITUR UI2022006552
Parties
Appellant: Entry Clearance Officer; Respondent: Sandeep Mohan Khera
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
10 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Immigration Appeal / Remaking of Decision After First Tier Tribunal Decision Set Aside
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Appendix FM Financial Requirements, Article 8 ECHR, Exceptional Circumstances, Entry Clearance, Family Life
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Appendix FM Financial Requirements Article 8 ECHR Exceptional Circumstances Entry Clearance Family Life

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Entry Clearance Officer

Appellant

Sandeep Mohan Khera

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal of entry clearance could result in unjustifiably harsh consequences under GEN.3.1(1)(b) of Appendix FM
  2. 2 Whether the financial requirement can be met through third party support under Appendix FM-SE
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'could' versus 'would' in the context of GEN.3.1 and GEN.3.2

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant met the requirements of GEN.3.1 because refusal of entry clearance could result in unjustifiably harsh consequences, and the financial requirement was satisfied through a credible guarantee of sustainable financial support from his son. The threshold under GEN.3.1(1)(b) is possibility, not likelihood, and was met on the facts. Therefore, refusal would be disproportionate under Article 8 ECHR.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Entry clearance to be granted to Sandeep Mohan Khera