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 Β£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 >> AA003422013 [2014] UKAITUR AA003422013 (15 April 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2014/AA003422013.html Cite as: [2014] UKAITUR AA3422013, [2014] UKAITUR AA003422013 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/00342/2013
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
| Heard at Field House | Determination Promulgated |
| On 14th April 2014 | On 15th April 2014 |
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE COKER
Between
M B
(Anonymity direction made)
Appellant
And
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation:
For the Appellant: Ms G Loughran, counsel, instructed by Wilson Solicitors LLP
For the Respondent: Mr P Nath, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The appellant was granted permission to appeal a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Drabu who had dismissed his appeal against a decision to remove him from the UK pursuant to s10 Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
2. It was agreed before me that there was an error of law in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal such that the decision should be set aside to be remade. The error of law, in essence, was a failure by the First-tier Tribunal judge to adequately consider the issue of trafficking and Article 8.
3. The SSHD through the presenting officer at the First-tier Tribunal in front of Judge Drabu had conceded that the appellants credibility was not in issue although the presenting officer relied upon the reasons for refusal of asylum letter dated 7th January 2013. Mr Nath confirmed that concession before me today. The effect of this is that the issues at large are sufficiency of protection, internal relocation and Article 8.
4. These matters are of substance and there have been no findings with regard to this. The scheme of the Tribunals Court and Enforcement Act 2007 does not assign the function of primary fact finding to the Upper Tribunal.
5. When a decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside s.12(2) of the TCEA 2007 requires me to remit the case to the First tier with directions or remake it for myself. In accordance with the Practice Statement dated 25th September 2012 of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal and in particular the nature of the judicial fact finding which is necessary in order for the decision in the appeal to be re-made and having regard to the overriding objective in rule 2 of the Practice Statement, it is appropriate in this appeal for the case to be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal.
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
I remit the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal to be remade.
Anonymity
The First-tier Tribunal made an order pursuant to rule 45(4)(i) of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005.
I continue that order (pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008).
Date 14th April 2014
Judge of the Upper Tribunal Coker
