- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator
I think it is that your appleal failed on both immigration and human right grounds.charles4u wrote:..A UK-visa decision appeal letter says :
1 Dismiss the immigration appeal.
2 Dismiss the human right appeal.
...What does it mean pls ?..was the case dismissed/cancelled or ?
The clue lies in the words "dismiss" and "appeal".charles4u wrote:..A UK-visa decision appeal letter says :
1 Dismiss the immigration appeal.
2 Dismiss the human right appeal.
...What does it mean pls ?..was the case dismissed/cancelled or ?
Oh...I didnt know you guys would remember me so thats why I just wrote it that way, Yes its my case and I said visa cus the EEA FP is also a visa.Richard66 wrote:It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?
Infact I think it was made purely on the UK national law cus they didnt refare to any EU law or directive at all. They also didnt state anything about my marriage being a marriage of convenience.isceon wrote:no reference to EU laws at all and freedom of movement .How bizzare
did the court recognised that ur marriage was genuine???
In view of Important Judgement : EEA Family Permits, perhaps you can make an application to the Tribunal to reconsider the decision, on the grounds that the Tribunal made an error in law?Richard66 wrote:It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?
Don't forget: How long do I have to make an Application for Reconsideration?My appeal has been dismissed. Can I appeal against the decision? wrote:If you wish to make an application for reconsideration you will need to complete an AIT/103A form which would have been sent to you with your original decision.
The case you refer to is not starred so can not be used as the basis of an appeal in regards an error of law.vinny wrote:In view of Important Judgement : EEA Family Permits, perhaps you can make an application to the Tribunal to reconsider the decision, on the grounds that the Tribunal made an error in law?Richard66 wrote:It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?
John wrote:Following on from the judgement in the Metock case by the ECJ, ...
From ur post I understand that ECO did not believe that ur marriage was not of convenience and genuine for that they refused u EEA. the immigation judge agreed with it and added that u could not rely on article 8 (assuming that a marriage of convenience could create a private life) because u could carry on living somewhere else(Romania).charles4u wrote:Infact I think it was made purely on the UK national law cus they didnt refare to any EU law or directive at all. They also didnt state anything about my marriage being a marriage of convenience.isceon wrote:no reference to EU laws at all and freedom of movement .How bizzare
did the court recognised that ur marriage was genuine???
These is the Article they refared to and what they quoted :
Article 8 to the ECHR
Article 8.1 states that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
Article 8.2 states that there should be no interference by a public authority with the excercise oh this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country...e.t.c.
I take into account the cases of Razgar (2004) UKHL 227 and Huang (2007) UKHK 11 AB (2007) EWCA Civ VW and MO (Article 8 - insurmountable obstacles) Uganda (2008) UKAIT 00021.
After talking about this cases above which is just on UK national law and all this is just about "insurmountable obstacles" cases..like one should give strong reasons of going to the UK. So they made this last sentence after talking about the above cases :
Assuming that a marriage of convenience creates a family and private life and that it is of sufficient gravity to engage Article 8, I am satisfied that such interference is in accordance with the law and a proportionate act made with the legitimate aim of upholding immigration control. I say this mindful that Article 8 does not impose on a state any general obligation to respect the choice of residence of a married couple, the applicable regulation has not been met and I do not find that any insurmountable obstacles or serious difficulties have been shown as to why the appellant and his wife cannot resume their private and family life outside the United Kingdom in, say, Romania or Nigeria".
I dismiss the immigration appeal
I dismiss the human rights appeal
This was all they said...
Thank you so much Richard, I understand myself I have posted much informations but I believe there is nothing to hide after all this is life and we have to live it till we have nothing else to live for. I just want people here to understand that its so unfair to treat people badly just in the name of rules and law...is there no more "free will" ?..everything as to be done under law and I cant even marry until we are together for numbered years stated in the stupid laws.Richard66 wrote:Charles, look at it dispassionately: you posted a lot of information about yourself and about your relationship. I read all that you posted and I must say I do think your position is a bit shaky. Read through all your posts and you might realise this.
I believe you are legitimate — no cleaver fraudster would be stupid enough to post such a story as yours online — but, unless you can come up with evidence, solid evidence, to prove otherwise, your story is bound to seem to be the one of a marriage of convenience and I can understand the ECO's point of view and I can see why your appeal failed. Has it occurred to you they probably believe either your wife is not pregnant or that the child is not even yours?
You need legal advice. Fighting this war on your own is only damaging your case.