Case No. UKUT-00133-(IAC)

) v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 784; [2016] WLR 4418 (“Giri”) where the Court of Appeal held that dishonesty was not a ‘precedent fact’ in the context of that judgment. 45.In Giri, a case where the Secretary of State refused an application under the Immigration Rules based on dishonesty, the Court of Appeal rejected the argument that the issue of deception was one of ‘precedent fact’ to be determined by the reviewing court. It was held that the findings made by the Secretary of State in decisions taken under the Immigration Rules, “are open to challenge in Judicial Review proceedings only on Wednesbury principles” and that “it is not a situation in which their powers depend on some precedent fact the existence of which falls for determination by the court itself”. 46.Ms Anderson also relied on Begum which, she submitted, made similar statements of principle as to the approach on judicial review by Richards LJ in