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 >> PA121432017 [2019] UKAITUR PA121432017 (4 December 2019) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2019/PA121432017.html Cite as: [2019] UKAITUR PA121432017 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Asylum and Immigration tribunal-b&w-tiff"
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/12143/2017
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Determined at Field House without a hearing |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
On 3 December 2019 |
On 4 December 2019 |
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE RINTOUL
Between
A Y
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
DECISION AND REASONS
1. On 11 November 2019 I gave the following directions:-
1. Having had regard to the decision of the First-tier Tribunal, and the grounds of challenge upon which permission was granted, it is my preliminary view that the First-tier Tribunal erred:
(1) with respect to his approach to the Article 8 case and permitted a procedural error amounting to an error of law: and
(2) in his approach to credibility, making contrary findings as is averred in the grounds at 3 (b) and (d), the latter resulting from a manifest factual error by the judge.
2. In the circumstances, and given that the (2) goes to the core of the claim, it is my preliminary view that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal should be set aside on the basis that it involved the making of an error of law and that the appropriate course of action would be to remit the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh decision on all issues.
3. Unless within ten working days of the issue of these directions there is any written objection to this course of action, supported by cogent argument, the Upper Tribunal will proceed to determine the appeal without an oral hearing and will remit it to the First-tier Tribunal.
4. In the absence of a timely response by a party, it will be presumed that it has no objection to the course of action proposed
2. On 2 December 2019, the respondent wrote to the Upper Tribunal stating that they accept that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error of law.
3. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did involve the making of an error of law and I set it aside. I remit the decision to the First-tier Tribunal.
Summary of conclusions
1. The determination of the First-tier Tribunal did involve the making of an error of law and I set it aside.
2. I remit the decision to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh hearing on all grounds. For the avoidance of doubt none of the findings it made are preserved.
Signed Date: 3 December 2019
Upper Tribunal Judge Rintoul