[2023] UKUT 00164 (IAC)

The appellant has been represented by solicitors and Mr Pipe of Counsel throughout these proceedings. In compliance with directions, his solicitors provided an appeal skeleton argument (‘ASA’) dated 9 September 2022, prepared by Mr Pipe. The ASA complies with the requirements of the Practice Statement No 1 of 2022 (‘the PS’) in that it contain three sections: (i) a brief summary of the factual case; (ii) a schedule of issues; (iii) brief submissions on those issues which state why the appellant disagrees with the respondent’s decision with sufficient detail to enable the reasons for the challenge to be understood [A.4 and A.5]. The ASA also complies with the requirements of [A.6] as it: is concise; is set out in numbered paragraphs; engages with the decision letter under challenge; does not include extensive quotations from documents or authorities; identifies the relevant evidence and principles of law to enable the basis of the challenge to be understood [A.6]. As the ASA refers to material not included in the respondent’s bundle, the relevant material was provided in an indexed and paginated 326-page bundle at the same time [A.7].

The schedule of disputed issues in the ASA draws upon the issues in the refusal decision as follows:

Applying either s.117C of the 2002 Act or paragraphs 398-399 of the Immigration Rules, this appellant is deemed to be a medium offender as he was not sentenced to a period of imprisonment of four years or more. S.117C(3) provides that the public interest requires the appellant’s deportation unless Exception 1 (must be lawfully resident, socially and culturally integrated in the UK and there would be very significant obstacles to integration in returning country) or Exception 2 (effect of deportation on partner or qualifying child would be unduly harsh) applies.