BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments >> IA452922013 [2014] UKAITUR IA452922013 (29 May 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2014/IA452922013.html Cite as: [2014] UKAITUR IA452922013 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/45292/2013
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
| Heard at Glasgow | Determination promulgated |
| on 23 May 2014 | on 29 May 2014 |
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MACLEMAN
Between
O J ODOKO
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
For the Appellant: Mr H Ndubuisi, of Drummond Miller, Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr A Mullen, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
No anonymity order requested or made
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The appellant appeals against a determination by First-tier Tribunal Judge Fox, dismissing his appeal against refusal of a residence card.
2. Permission to appeal to the UT was granted on paragraphs 1 -5 and 7 of the grounds. Mr Ndubuisi accepted that paragraph 6 is only narrative.
3. As Mr Ndubuisi was winding up his submission, Mr Mullen (fairly and correctly) conceded that the judge went wrong as to the date for admissibility of evidence (ground 1) and by failing to consider evidence of transfer of funds to the appellant in Nigeria (ground 3). While ground 7 might be based on an observation which makes no difference, the other grounds might also show lack of underpinning for the findings about dependency and household membership.
4. Representatives agreed that the case should be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for fresh hearing.
5. The determination is set aside. No findings of the FtT are to stand. Under s.12(2)(b)(i) of the 2007 Act and Practice Statement 7.2 the nature and extent of judicial fact finding necessary for the decision to be remade is such that it is appropriate to remit the case to the FtT. The member(s) of the FtT chosen to reconsider the case are not to include Judge Fox.
23 May 2014
Judge of the Upper Tribunal
