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 >> EA026652015 [2018] UKAITUR EA026652015 (29 January 2018) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2018/EA026652015.html Cite as: [2018] UKAITUR EA026652015, [2018] UKAITUR EA26652015 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: EA/02665/2015
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
|
Heard at Field House |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
|
On 10 January 2018 |
On 29 January 2018 |
|
|
|
Before
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE I A LEWIS
Between
mohammad ibrahim
(anonymity direction not made)
Appellant
and
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: No appearance and no representative
For the Respondent: Mr N Bramble, Home Office Presenting Officer
DECISION AND REASONS
1. This is an appeal against the decision of Designated First-tier Tribunal Judge Woodcraft promulgated on 13 March 2017, brought with the permission of Designated First-tier Tribunal McCarthy granted on 25 October 2017.
2. Judge Woodcraft declined to engage with the facts and issues in the appeal in reliance upon the case of Sala (EFMs: Right of Appeal: Albania) [2016] UKUT 411 (IAC).
3. The decision in Sala has since been overturned by the Court of Appeal in MK v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 1755. The effect is that the Respondent now acknowledges that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal should be set aside for error of law and the appeal be heard afresh before the First-tier Tribunal with all issues under the EEA Regulations at large.
4. I agree that that is the appropriate approach.
5. It does seem to me that the appeal can be reheard by any Judge - including Judge Woodcraft who did not engage with the evidence or make any findings of fact. Notwithstanding this observation, it is a matter for Listing as to who should now remake the decision in the appeal.
Notice of Decision
6. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is vitiated for error of law.
7. The decision in the appeal is to be remade before the First-tier Tribunal by any Judge with all issues at large .
8. No anonymity direction is sought or made.
The above represents a corrected transcript if ex tempore reasons given at the conclusion of the hearing.
Signed: Date: 26 January 2018
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge I A Lewis
