Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
The type of visa he had meant he had to show the evidence for the visa to be valid to border control when he arrived. He didn't have enough to substantiate it. Border Force gave him until 8.30am in the morning to produce the evidence but about 48 minutes before the deadline border force canceled his visa. He won on a technicality that he wasn't given the allotted time to produce the evidence. That's kind of it in a very short version. A lot of court cases are won or thrown out on technicalities.
This is something new that I'm learning even in my old age.

I mean I've helped friends and relatives apply for visa coming over for holidays, to study, etc and whenever there is any requirement for additional documents, those are uploaded and sent to Immigration for them to review before visas are approved and issued. Mind you, this was all pre-covid.

So if all the documents have already been sent online, and the visa is approved on that basis. I fail to see how border force can cancel a visa after you have arrived on a approved visa ? Also if evidence is needed, you would still produce the very same doc that was uploaded and approved earlier. So what this tells me is that the "doc evidence" that was "approved" earlier is now "no longer acceptable" ? Is that even legal ? No wonder a judge will say "what else do you expect Djokovic to do ?" I mean who would spend thousands of dollars on airfare on a "maybe you can get in depending on the mood of the officer visa" ?