The tribunal has allowed two appeals on the basis that Pankina does not only apply to the three month rule and that all an applicant need do is comply with the requirements of the Immigration Rules themselves. See FA and AA (PBS effect of Pankina) Nigeria  UKUT 304 (IAC) in relation to the scope and effect of Pankina. The determination is that of the Deputy President, Mr Ockelton, and El Presidente Blake and Mr Allen were also on the panel. Quite high powered, then.
In a related case, CDS (PBS “available” Article 8) Brazil  UKUT 305 (IAC), the same configuration of judges on the same day with the same Presenting Officer (not a fun day out for Mr Avery?) held that the only requirement on maintenance for a student at the relevant time was that the £800 of funds be ‘available’ to the applicant. Funds held by a third party sponsor for this purpose are acceptable, following Mahad.
Two very sensible and welcome decisions.