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 >> HU025582020 [2023] UKAITUR HU025582020 (16 March 2023) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2023/HU025582020.html Cite as: [2023] UKAITUR HU25582020, [2023] UKAITUR HU025582020 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER |
Ce-File Number: UI-2021-000719 First-tier Tribunal No: HU/02558/2020 |
|
|
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
|
Heard at Field House IAC On the 26 January 2023
|
|
Decision & Reasons Promulgated On the 16 March 2023
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE O'CALLAGHAN
Between
ABUL HASNAT
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT made)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: In person
For the Respondent: Ms. A Nolan, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DECISION AND REASONS
Introduction
1. The appellant appeals against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal dismissing his human rights appeal by a decision dated 7 July 2021.
2. He seeks indefinite leave to remain on the basis of ten years' lawful residence under paragraph 276B of the Immigration Rules.
3. Upper Tribunal Judge Kamara reasoned when granting the appellant permission to appeal by a decision dated 8 March 2022:
'The grounds raise serious issues of procedural fairness and impropriety. The Judge arguably erred in making a number of allegations in the decision and reasons, which had never been made previously, without raising those concerns during the proceedings as well as relying on those adverse findings in their fact-finding.'
Discussion
4. Ms. Nolan accepted at the outset of the hearing that the Judge had acted with procedural unfairness by making adverse credibility findings in respect of issues that were neither relied upon by the respondent, nor put to the appellant at the hearing. She accepted the evidence of the appellant's counsel before the First-tier Tribunal, Mr. David Jones, as to events before the Judge.
5. In the circumstances, the only proper course is for the decision of the Judge to be set aside in its entirety, and for the matter to be remitted back to the First-tier Tribunal.
6. The appellant requested that the matter be remitted to Taylor House, the hearing centre closest to him, rather than Hatton Cross where his appeal was initially heard. I consented to the request at the hearing.
Decision
7. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal dated 7 July 2021 is set aside by reason of material error of law. No findings of fact are preserved.
8. The resumed hearing will take place in the First-tier Tribunal, at Taylor House.
Signed: D O'Callaghan
Upper Tribunal Judge O'Callaghan
Date: 26 January 2023