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 >> IA242752014 [2015] UKAITUR IA242752014 (5 February 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2015/IA242752014.html Cite as: [2015] UKAITUR IA242752014 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/24275/2014
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
| Field House | Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
| Determined on the papers | On 5th February 2015 |
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE O’CONNOR
Between
MD QUAMRUL HASAN
Appellant
and
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Respondent
DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant is a national of Bangladesh born 5 October 1984. He appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against a decision made by the Respondent on 14 May 2014. It is not in dispute that on 20 August 2014 the Respondent withdrew the immigration decision of 14 May 2014.
2. As a consequence of the operation of rule 17(2) of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005 “an appeal shall be treated as withdrawn of the respondent notifies the Tribunal that the decision to which the appeal relates has been withdrawn.” The evidence before me discloses that the First-tier Tribunal was notified of the withdrawal of the immigration decision by fax on 20 August. As a consequence, the appellant’s appeal ought to have been treated as having been withdrawn.
3. However, First-tier Tribunal Horvath, in ignorance of the Secretary of State’s withdrawal of the immigration decision, determined the appellant’s appeal by way of a decision promulgated on the 20 October 2014. She had no jurisdiction to do so.
4. Consequently, the determination of Judge Horvath is set aside, there having been no appeal before her to determine. None of the findings made therein are to be preserved.
5. By section 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 if the Upper Tribunal sets aside a decision of the First-tier Tribunal it must either remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal for further decision or re-make the decision for itself. The Act permits of no other course of action. Consequently, if it is necessary for me to do so in order to formally dispose of the appeal before the Upper Tribunal in accordance with the 2007 Act, I re-make the decision dismissing the appellant’s appeal solely because of a want of jurisdiction. I have not considered the merits of the appellant’s case in coming to this conclusion and nothing in this decision should be construed as casting any light on my view as to such.
Notice of Decision
The determination of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside and for the reasons set out above the appellant’s appeal before the Upper Tribunal is dismissed.
Signed:
Upper Tribunal Judge O’Connor
Date: 5 February 2015
