Entry clearance officer, Kingston v Martin
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 03 March 1978 |
| Date | 03 March 1978 |
| Court | Immigration Appeals Tribunal |
Immigration Appeal Tribunal
P. N. Dalton Esq (Vice-President), A. J. Coles Esq, Sir Gordon Whitteridge
K. E. R. Rogers for the appellant entry clearance officer.
Z. H. Chishti of the United Kingdom Immigrants Advisory Service, for the respondent daughter.
Children Sole responsibility for the child's upbringing Daughter aged 17 in relative's care in Jamaica for 12 years Financial support fairly regularly sent by sponsoring mother and interest maintained in daughter's schooling and welfare Support also from foster family, and guidance Contact with father locally and small financial contributions from him Whether sponsoring mother had the sole responsibility for daughter's upbringing Sloley v Entry Certificate Officer, Kingston ([1973] Imm. A.R. 54) distinguishedHC 79, para 43(e)
In the determination reported below the Tribunal reviewed the factors which were required to be shown under para 43(e) of HC 79 if, after leaving her daughter in the care of relatives in Jamaica for 12 years, the girl's sponsoring mother sought to bring her (aged 17) to the United Kingdom for settlement. On its facts the Tribunal distinguished the present case from Sloley v Entry Certificate Officer KingstonUNK, ([1973] Imm. A.R. 54), a case similarly under the sole responsibility provision affecting children in the Immigration Rules for Control on Entry.
Determination
The entry clearance officer, Kingston, is appealing against the determination of an adjudicator, allowing the appeal of Sybil Sylvia Martin (born 22.4.59) against the refusal of entry clearance (on 15.10.76) to enable her to join her mother in this country. Miss Martin's mother is Mrs Myrtle White who lives at 7 Worcester Road, London, E17, with her husband Mr Clinton White. He came to this country in 1962, Mrs White came in 1965, and they were married in 1966. Before coming to this country from Jamaica Mrs White had other children besides Sybil. By a Mr Frederick McLean she had Daisy McLean, Hubert McLean and Dennis McLean (all older than Sybil), and by her present husband she had (after Sybil) Richard and Edgar White. When her mother left Jamaica, Sybil was left with Miss Eva Burke, the common law wife of Frederick McLean, the father of three of the sponsor's children.
The respondent's father, John Martin, lives in the same parish as Sybil and she said that she was his only child and visited him periodically and if she asked him for money he would usually...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
TD (paragraph 297(I) (e): 'Sole responsibility') Yemen
...[1972] Imm AR 69 Entry Clearance Officer, Accra v Otuo-Acheampong [2002] UKIAT 06687 Entry Clearance Officer, Kingston v Martin [1978] Imm AR 100 Eugene v Entry Clearance Officer, Bridgetown [1975] Imm AR 111 Martin v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1972] Imm AR 71 Nmaju, Nmaju ......
-
TD (Paragraph 297(i))
...evidence of regular contact, consultation and decision taking Such evidence is not before us.” 19 (See also ECO, Kingston v Martin [1978] Imm AR 100 where the appellant's father also provided money which was interpreted by the IAT as amounting to contributions to the maintenance of the appe......
-
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and asylum chamber), 2006-05-24, [2006] UKAIT 49 (TD (Paragraph 297(i)(e): sole responsibility))
...precise evidence of regular contact, consultation and decision taking Such evidence is not before us.” (See also ECO, Kingston v Martin [1978] Imm AR 100 where the appellant’s father also provided money which was interpreted by the IAT as amounting to contributions to the maintenance of the......
-
Rudolph v Entry clearance officer, Colombo
...financial support there must be cogent evidence of genuine interest in and affection for the child by the parent. In the case of Martin (1978) Imm AR 100, stress was laid on the desirability of evidence to show continuous consultation between the guardian in the country where the appellant ......