Importance of applicants providing correct information in initial application
30 July 2013
In SS (Nepal) v Entry Clearance Officer, the Court of Appeal has rejected the appeal of an applicant who was refused entry clearance because of a false representation that he had made on his application form, despite the fact that he had later corrected the misrepresentation at his interview.The applicant had applied to join his mother who was resident in the UK as a domestic worker. In his application form, he stated that he was living with his uncle, but made no mention of his father. In his interview, he stated that he was living with his father, asserting that was the true position, and made no mention of his uncle. His application was refused both on the basis that he did not meet the substantive requirement of the rule under which he had applied but also under paragraph 320(7A) of the Immigration Rules, which states that entry clearance is to be refused:
"where false representations have been made or false documents or information have been submitted (whether or not material to the application, and whether or not to the applicant's knowledge), or material facts have not been disclosed, in relation to the application or in order to obtain documents from the Secretary of State or a third party required in support of the application".
The applicant's appeal was dismissed by the First-tier Tribunal and by the Upper Tribunal, both of which found that he had made false representations. He then appealed to the Court of Appeal. The applicant was particularly concerned that the finding that he had made false representations would prevent him from succeeding in any fresh applications for entry clearance. Paragraph 320(7B) of the Rules says that an application for entry clearance is to be refused where an applicant has previously breached the UK's immigration laws by using deception within the last 10 years in an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or remain, or in order to obtain documents from the Secretary of State or a third party required in support of the application (whether successful or not). Paragraph 320(11) of the Immigration Rules states that entry clearance should normally be refused where the applicant has previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Rules by using deception in an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or remain or in order to obtain documents from the Secretary of State or a third party required in support of the application (whether successful or not).
The Court of Appeal held that the natural meaning of the wording of paragraph 320(7A) was that the application consisted of both the form and the interview. It found that the applicant had been dishonest. Paragraph 320(7A) required applicants to be honest throughout the process, not just through part of it.
The case presents a cautionary lesson to applicants. It shows the importance of ensuring that all of the information contained in the initial application is correct. If an error is made in completing the application form, then it may be treated as a false representation if corrected at a later stage unless it can be shown that an innocent error has been made. The consequences of such an error can be severe, affecting not only the present application, but also future applications as well.