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 >> VA351542012 & VA351552012 [2013] UKAITUR VA351542012 (31 July 2013) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2013/VA351542012.html Cite as: [2013] UKAITUR VA351542012 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Appeal Numbers:
VA 35154 2012
VA 35155 2012
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard at Sheldon Court |
|
On 29 July 2013 |
On 31 July 2013 |
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PERKINS
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE M A HALL
Between
ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER - LAGOS
Appellant
and
JULIET EKENNA OKEY UHEGWU
OKECHUKWU UWADIEGWU UHEGWU
Respondent
Representation:
For the Appellant: Dr N Uhegwu for the appellants
For the Respondent: Mr N Smart, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION
1. The respondents to this appeal (hereinafter “the claimants”) appealed successfully to the first tier tribunal a decision of the present appellant (hereinafter “the Entry Clearance Officer) to refuse them entry clearance as family visitors.
2. The Entry Clearance Officer was given permission to appeal because the First-tier Tribunal thought, wrongly, that it was arguable that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeals. For reasons that are not clear permission to appeal was granted in both appeals although the Entry Clearance Officer only challenged one of the decisions.
3. Before us Mr Smart recognised that the application for permission to appeal was misconceived and the Entry Clearance Officer’s case is unarguable. Both claimants are within the narrow band of relatives who, at the material time, could still appeal decisions to refuse them leave to enter as visitors.
4. In the premises we dismiss both of the appeals by the Entry Clearance Officer that are before us.
5. For the avoidance of doubt both claimants have shown that they satisfy the rules for admission to the United Kingdom as visitors and should be allowed to enter the United Kingdom in accordance with the First-tier Tribunal’s findings.
Signed |
|
Jonathan Perkins Judge of the Upper Tribunal |
Dated 30 July 2013 |