United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: HU/05209/2016

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Manchester.	Decision & Reasons Promulgated
Given ex-tempore on 15 th September 2017	On 27 th September 2017

 

 

Before

 

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley

 

Between

 

DAO TRONG TUAN

(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)

 

Appellant

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

 

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

 

For the Appellant: Mr Mynott a Representative appearing on behalf of RBC Consultancy

For the Respondent: Mr C Bates, Home Office Presenting Officer

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

 

 

1. The appellant is a citizen of Vietnam, born on 23 ^rd November 1972.

 

2. He entered the United Kingdom in July 2010. On 3 ^rd February 2016, his application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom on the basis of his marriage was refused by the Secretary of State. The appellant appealed and his appeal was heard by First-tier Tribunal Judge Lloyd on 16 ^th December 2016.

 

3. At paragraph 21 of the judge's determination, the judge found that the appellant plays a meaningful role in his stepdaughter's life and went on to find that he has a parental relationship with her, given that he has lived with her since late December 2013, and that she has no contact with her father. He accepted that the appellant had a family life in the United Kingdom with his wife, child and with his stepchild.

 

4. The judge accepted that it was not reasonable to expect the appellant's stepchild to leave the United Kingdom as she is a British citizen. However, the judge dismissed the appeal, rather than apply Section 117B(6).

 

5. At the hearing before me today, Mr Bates quite properly accepted that the judge had materially erred in law and invited me to allow the appeal.

 

6. The determination of Judge Lloyd is set aside, but the findings preserved. I remake the appeal and with the consent of the Home Office Presenting Officer this appeal is allowed.

 

No anonymity direction is made.

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley

 

 

 

 

TO THE RESPONDENT

FEE AWARD

 

As I have allowed the appeal and because a fee has been paid or is payable, and have decided to make no fee award / to make a fee award of any fee which has been paid or may be payable (adjusted where full award not justified) for the following reason. The application should have been allowed.

 

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley Date: 26 September 2017