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 >> OA007112015 [2016] UKAITUR OA007112015 (19 April 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2016/OA007112015.html Cite as: [2016] UKAITUR OA007112015, [2016] UKAITUR OA7112015 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: OA/00711/2015
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
No hearing |
Decision and Reasons Promulgated |
On 19 April 2016 | |
|
|
Before
MR C M G OCKELTON, VICE PRESIDENT
Between
THE ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICE, ISLAMABAD
Appellant
and
NASIR GUL
Respondent
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The respondent, whom I shall call "the claimant", appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against the decision of the Entry Clearance Officer refusing him entry clearance as a partner. Judge Hawden-Beal allowed his appeal. On application the respondent was granted permission to appeal to this Tribunal and accordingly the Tribunal stands seised of that appeal.
2. The claimant's solicitors have written to the Tribunal narrating the grant of entry clearance to the claimant and requesting withdrawal of "Mr Gul's appeal".
3. The present appeal is, as noted above, by the Entry Clearance Officer. As the claimant's solicitors must know, the provisions of rule 17 of the Upper Tribunal Rules allow a party to withdraw its case and I assume that that is what they meant because there is nothing else they could have been asking.
4. I accept the withdrawal of the claimant's case. The Entry Clearance Officer's appeal is unresisted and I formally allow it. There is no proper basis for saying that the grounds are without merit and I substitute a decision dismissing the appeal against the Entry Clearance Officer's decision, although I note that there has now been a grant of entry clearance, whether on the present or a subsequent application.
C. M. G. OCKELTON
VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER
Date: 6 April 2016