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 >> HU118222017 [2019] UKAITUR HU118222017 (5 February 2019) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2019/HU118222017.html Cite as: [2019] UKAITUR HU118222017 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) HU/11822/2017
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard at Glasgow |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
On 25 January 2019 |
On 5 February 2019 |
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MACLEMAN
Between
[H L]
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
For the Appellant: Mr D Katani, of Katani & Co, Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mrs M O'Brien, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The appellant appeals against the decision of FtT Judge Debra H Clapham, promulgated on 4 July 2019.
2. The FtT's decision at [34] refers to section 117B of the 2002 Act, and says that it "specifically states that consideration has to be given to whether it would be unduly harsh to expect the qualifying child to leave the UK".
3. The case involves two "qualifying" children, in terms of part 5A of the 2002 Act.
4. Section 117B(6) provides that in a case such as this, the public interest does not require removal "where ... it would not be reasonable to expect the child to leave the UK." It does not specify consideration of whether departure would be "unduly harsh".
5. The respondent conceded that the decision of the FtT errs on a point of law, and that considering the circumstances of the two children, it fell to be reversed.
6. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside, and the following decision is substituted: the appeal, as brought to the FtT, is allowed.
7. No anonymity direction has been requested or made.
25 January 2019
UT Judge Macleman