![]() |
[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 >> IA088492013 [2015] UKAITUR IA088492013 (16 April 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2015/IA088492013.html Cite as: [2015] UKAITUR IA88492013, [2015] UKAITUR IA088492013 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: IA/08849/2013
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard at Field House | Decision Promulgated |
On 13th April 2015 | On 16th April 2015 |
|
|
Before
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Rimington
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
Between
Muhammad Nauman Chaudhry
(No Anonymity Direction made)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation:
For the Appellant: None
For the Respondent: Mr P Duffy, Home Office Presenting Officer
NOTICE OF ABANDONED APPEAL
The Appellant
1. The appellant is a citizen of Pakistan born on 12th January 1980. He applied on 22nd December 2012 and within the leave of his visa for leave to remain as a Tier 4 (Student) Migrant. (He was first granted leave to enter on 1st September 2004). That application was refused on 2nd March 2013. His appeal to the First Tier Tribunal was dismissed, as was his appeal for permission to appeal and the renewal application to the Upper Tribunal. Following judicial review proceedings and an order from Master Gidden in the High Court dated 14th February 2014, quashing the decision of the Upper Tribunal to refuse permission, the application for permission to appeal was granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Ockelton on 9th January 2015.
2. At the appeal before me there was no representation on behalf of the appellant and he did not attend.
3. Mr Duffy advised that the appellant had been granted leave on the basis of Long Residency (10 years) and pursuant to Section 104 of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 the appeal before me was effectively abandoned.
4. This is a Notice to inform the parties that the appellant’s case is treated as abandoned.
5. The effect of the appellant’s case being abandoned is that the proceedings before the Upper Tribunal are at an end. There is no appeal before the Upper Tribunal.
Signed Date 13th April 2015
Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal Rimington