This determination should be read in conjunction with Moneke and others (EEA – OFMs) Nigeria [2011] UKUT 00341 (IAC).
In determining appeals regarding OFM applications made in country, Immigration Judges should scrutinise with some care the supporting evidence, in order to satisfy themselves that the burden of proof demonstrating eligibility has been discharged.
In the present case, the Upper Tribunal was not satisfied by the evidence because:
a) There were substantial gaps in the evidence produced by the appellants despite the opportunity afforded to submit further material in the light of our previous decision.
b) The appellants produced no documentary evidence to support their claims: (i) to have been provided with financial support by their sponsor to meet their essential living needs when the sponsor was in Germany or before that in Nigeria; (ii) that they lived in the sponsor’s household in Nigeria; (iii) that they were in apprenticeships with nil earnings in Nigeria; (iv) the amount of material support they needed to meet their essential living needs.
c) The oral evidence was implausible as to material parts and flawed by inconsistencies.
d) Both appellants misrepresented their intentions when seeking to enter as visitors.
Judges:
Blake P, Storey UTJ
Citations:
[2011] UKUT 430 (IAC)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Immigration
Updated: 26 September 2022; Ref: scu.448395