Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber

[2025] UKUT 00091 (IAC)

Fecha: 13-Ene-2025

Grounds of challenge

Grounds of challenge

16.

The first applicant is the lead applicant in this claim for judicial review. The second applicant is, as I have said, her husband. The third to fifth applicants are their children. The second to fifth applicants’ claims are dependent upon the first applicant’s claim.

17.

Permission was initially refused on the papers by Upper Tribunal Judge Mahmood by an order dated 13 August 2024 . At a hearing on 16 October 2024, UTJJ Canavan and Ruddick granted permission on ground 2 only.

18.

As pleaded, Ground 2 has a number of facets:

First, neither decision set out which provision of para. 8.6(a) the first applicant had allegedly failed to meet;

Secondly, para. 8.6 is, in fact met, in the circumstances of these proceedings;

Thirdly, both decisions of the Secretary of State raised additional issues beyond the scope of para. 8.6(a);

At the date of the application to the Secretary of State, the first applicant was not, in fact, the 100% shareholder of Serena Euro; Serena UAE was by then the shareholder and had overall control;

Contrary to what was asserted in each decision, the applicant did provide UK invoices and bank statements, and they were overlooked;

The Immigration Rules do not require all invoices to be issued to the sole representative;

The Secretary of State failed properly to consider the relevant provisions of the Immigration Rules and the “vast” number of supporting documents.