I dont understand..

[charles4u]

..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 ?

[Richard66]

I do not either. Maybe you can explain what this is. Is this your case?

[yhdyhd]

..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 ?

I think it is that your appleal failed on both immigration and human right grounds.

[Siggi]

Charles, there is nothing to understand, you have run the guantlet with UK HO office for so long now, trying alsorts of tricks, non of which have really worked.

You are obviously a intelligent man, so I would suggest you focus your time, money and energy into sometime else other than trying to enter the UK.

Good luck in the future.

[Richard66]

It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?

[Mr Rusty]

..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".

What's not to understand?

[charles4u]

It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?

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.

In the end of the conclusion of the decisions its says, "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

That was what they wrote in the last part of the sentence without giving any strong reason, anyway just like someone said above. I have told my wife to come back home and we have to figure things out...Thank you all.

[isceon]

very very strange an EEA family permit being refused and those arguments given:
charles says:
In the end of the conclusion of the decisions its says, "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

no reference to EU laws at all and freedom of movement .How bizzare
did the court recognised that ur marriage was genuine???

[charles4u]

no reference to EU laws at all and freedom of movement .How bizzare
did the court recognised that ur marriage was genuine???

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.

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...

[MAKUSA]

Absolute rubbish, Charles they turned you down based on the human rights law, they have used the local immigration law to tackle your problems, you need to get in touch with a solicitor, the AIT Judge never addressed your wife´s right under community law, did you get a solicitor for your appeal?

[vinny]

It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?

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?

[charles4u]

...Thank you all, I am a bit confused and surely I have my plans already with my wife but I still wanna make this case till Jesus comes. Its so unfair the way they makes cases mostly when they see one is right then they try to twist it.

So how can I Vinny how can I make an application to the Tribunal to reconsider the decision, on the grounds that the Tribunal made an error in law ?

[vinny]

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.

Don't forget: How long do I have to make an Application for Reconsideration?

[Frontier Mole]

It cannot be Charles', because he was applying for an EEA FP, not a visa. Maybe you can explain, Charles?

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?

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]

Following on from the judgement in the Metock case by the ECJ, ...

[isceon]

no reference to EU laws at all and freedom of movement .How bizzare
did the court recognised that ur marriage was genuine???

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.

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...

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).
European directive is clear :
Article 35
Abuse of rights
Member States may adopt the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right
conferred by this Directive in the case of abuse of rights or fraud, such as marriages of convenience.
Any such measure shall be proportionate and subject to the procedural safeguards provided for in
Articles 30 and 31.
Note that previous court cases held that marriage of convenince are not illegal just not acceptable in immigration law.
I think u had a very bad representation or did not provide enough evidence of ur marriage.
Of course I am just speculating.
Good luck my friend

[charles4u]

Thank you all, Well they should have stated that they believe my marriage was for conveniency and give reasons or proves but they didnt, they should have used EU directive or law to judge the case but they didnt instead they were refaring to Insurmountable obstacles which gat nothing to do with my case at all.

Also...in the appeal decision letter they wrote I didnt show evidence of my wifes pregnancy in-which I did and some of you here also saw it when I posted the list of documents i submited. Anyway this is it.

[Frontier Mole]

I agree - the appeal was on the question of the marriage. It was not accepted that the marriage was not one of convenience and as such the decision given by AIT agrees with the ECO.

Metock will not overcome that point.

If you apply again with evidence of the pregnancy you might stand a better chance. HOWEVER you will need to prove the unborn child is yours.

[isceon]

I agree

[charles4u]

...So I have to show all this after the whole first document I showed ?...all in the nameof I wanna join my wife in the UK ?

...Well thank God am not banned from EU...so there are options and I just wanted my wife to finish her nursing program thats all.

[charles4u]

...I try to make it viewable online so check this if I got it correctly.

http://convert.neevia.com/prods/a4e4fa9 ... al%207.pdf

[vinny]

See also EEA residence card refusal/marriage of convenience.

[Richard66]

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.

[charles4u]

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.

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.

They assume we got married too fast, do I have to get married 5 years after ?...Anyway as you said Richard, I will try to contact a lawyer or solicitor for any thing that can be done. Thanks so much

[shandave2001]

Hello Charles

And before hiring solicitor/lawyer, check that solicitor/lawyer's previous record that he has dealt such cases before.

Law Society's website provides solicitors' and their firms details.