BAILII [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 >> HU080552020 [2022] UKAITUR HU080552020 (22 September 2022)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2022/HU080552020.html
Cite as: [2022] UKAITUR HU80552020, [2022] UKAITUR HU080552020

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: HU/08055/2020

UI-2021-000870

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at Field House

Decision & Reasons Promulgated

On 2 August 2022

On 22 September 2022

 

 

 

Before

 

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE FRANCES

 

 

Between

 

RAJ KUMAR GHALE

(anonymity direction not MADE)

Appellant

and

 

THE ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

For the Appellant: Ms R Dulay, instructed by Sam Solicitors

For the Respondent: Mr S Walker, Home Office Presenting Officer

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

1.              The appellant is a citizen of Nepal born on 13 July 1974. He appeals against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge C Fern, dated 25 June 2021, dismissing his appeal against the refusal of entry clearance on human rights grounds.

2.              Permission was granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Kamara on 18 January 2022 on the grounds it was arguable the judge failed to assess the existence of family life at the time the sponsor left Nepal.

3.              Mr Walker conceded there was a material error of law in the decision because the judge had failed to consider the existence of family life at the time the sponsor came to the UK. Ms Dulay referred me to [60] and submitted this was a fundamental starting point which could not be read into the decision. I am just persuaded this error is material notwithstanding [71].

4.              Ms Dulay also submitted the judge had failed to consider the sponsor's second witness statement in which she explained why there was no documentary evidence of financial support from 2011 to 2016. I am satisfied the three grounds of appeal disclose material errors of law.

5.              Accordingly, I find the judge materially erred in law and set the decision aside. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be re-heard de novo by a judge other than Judge Fern. None of the judge's findings are preserved.

 

Notice of Decision

Appeal allowed.

 

 

J Frances

 

Signed Date: 2 August 2022

Upper Tribunal Judge Frances

 

 

 


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2022/HU080552020.html