[2025] UKUT 00229 (IAC)

Ground Two. The ECO’s original decision was vitiated by her failure to apply the Evidential Flexibility policy correctly and that policy was prima facie applicable in circumstances in which there was reason to believe that the applicant could obtain the missing document.

Ground One. The Administrative Review decision was vitiated by the respondent’s failure to consider the test for the admission of further evidence in paragraph AR3.3. It is not clear that the same outcome would have been reached if the correct approach had been applied. Gateway (d) was not available to the applicant but gateway (e) was available.

Ground Three. The ECO’s original decision and the Administrative Review decision were unlawful for failing to consider whether to grant leave outside the Rules, and it is not clear that the same outcome would have been reached if the correct approach had been applied.