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 >> EA035272015 [2017] UKAITUR EA035272015 (28 December 2017) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2017/EA035272015.html Cite as: [2017] UKAITUR EA035272015, [2017] UKAITUR EA35272015 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: EA/03527/2015
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
|
Heard at Field House |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
|
On 22 nd December 2017 |
On 28 th December 2017 |
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE COKER
Between
MAHMOOD AHMED ALI EL HAG
Appellant
And
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Mr J Rene, instructed by Waterfields Elder Rahimi Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr P Deller, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. On 17 th November 2017, I granted the appellant permission to appeal in the following terms:
1. Permission to appeal the First-tier Tribunal decision having been given by the Upper Tribunal on 27th October 2017 following the decision in Khan v SSHD [2017] EWCA Civ 1755, the Upper Tribunal proposes
(a) to find a material error of law in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction;
(b) remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal for hearing.
2. If either party objects to this course of action they are directed to make written submissions to be received by the Upper Tribunal within 14 days of the date of these directions being sent out.
3. If no written submissions are received, the Tribunal's decision as set out in (1) above stands and the case will be remitted for hearing before the First-tier Tribunal.
2. The respondent, in her Rule 24 response stated that she as considering her position and requested an oral hearing. Mr Deller informed me that an application for permission had been made to the Supreme Court but the outcome was awaited.
3. The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Khan v SSHD [2017] EWCA Civ 1755 represents the law and is binding on the UT. Importantly, the Court did not stay paragraph 1 of its Order, which was to allow the appeal.
4. For this reason, I allow the appeal and remit the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal for determination.
Conclusions:
The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did involve the making of an error on a point of law.
I set aside the decision and remit the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal to remake.
Date 22 nd December 2017
Upper Tribunal Judge Coker
