Secretary of State for the Home Department v Varkey & Anor
[2024] UKUT 142 (IAC)
Jagtar Ram v Secretary of State for the Home Department
11 October 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1323
Court of Appeal
Someone's visa application was rejected because he was suspected of cheating on an English test at a college known for cheating. A judge reviewed the evidence and believed the person cheated, and a higher court agreed. Even though the person said they didn't cheat, the evidence against them was too strong.
Key Facts
- •Jagtar Ram, an Indian national, had his application for further leave to remain refused on suitability grounds.
- •The refusal was based on allegations that he used a proxy for the oral part of his TOEIC English proficiency test in 2012.
- •The test was taken at New London College (NLC), known for widespread cheating.
- •The Upper Tribunal (UT) dismissed Ram's appeal, finding that he had likely cheated based on ETS audit results and NLC's history of fraud.
- •Ram appealed to the Court of Appeal, arguing insufficient analysis of his evidence and excessive reliance on DK and RK v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKUT 00112 (IAC).
Legal Principles
The correct approach for determining proxy use in ETS tests is outlined in DK and RK, including the assessment of ETS's reliability and the evidence of 'fraud factories'.
DK and RK v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKUT 00112 (IAC)
A strong prima facie case established by generic evidence can be rebutted by credible evidence from the applicant.
DK and RK v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKUT 00112 (IAC)
Appellate courts should generally not interfere with a trial judge's factual findings unless there is an error of law.
FAGE v Chobani [2014] EWCA Civ 5 and Volpi & Delta Ltd v Volpi [2021] EWCA Civ 464
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal dismissed Ram's appeal.
The judge properly considered Ram's evidence but found it insufficient to outweigh the strong evidence of fraud, given the context of NLC's reputation and the ETS audit results. The Court of Appeal found no error of law in the judge's assessment.
Similar Cases
Shahanas Kanhirakandan v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWCA Civ 1298
Gurdeep Kaur v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWCA Civ 1353
Mary Jane Baluden Oceana, R (on the application of) v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
[2023] EWHC 791 (Admin)
Hafiz Aman Ullah v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWCA Civ 201