![]() |
[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 >> IA177212014 [2016] UKAITUR IA177212014 (12 April 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2016/IA177212014.html Cite as: [2016] UKAITUR IA177212014 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/17721/2014
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard at Birmingham Employment Centre |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
On 5 th April 2016 |
On 12 th April 2016 |
|
|
Before
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE McCARTHY
Between
nasser mussa abdallah
(no anonymity order)
Appellant
and
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR the HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Appellant in person
For the Respondent: Mr A McVeety, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DECISION: APPEAL WITHDRAWN
1. On 22 October 2015 I found there was an error on a point of law in the decision and reasons statement of First-tier Tribunal Judge Pooler that was sent out on 31 October 2014 and I set that decision aside.
2. Because it had not been possible to remake the decision at that time, the Tribunal arrange a further hearing. Shortly before the resumed hearing, the Tribunal was informed by Mr D Mills (a Senior Presenting Officer) that the Home Office was withdrawing the decision originally appealed against because the appellant had provided a current and satisfactory English language certificate. On the basis of the new evidence, the Home Office would grant the appellant leave as all the requirements of paragraph 284 of the Immigration Rules were met. In such circumstances, the Tribunal was invited to treat the appeal as withdrawn.
3. Mr McVeety confirmed these facts and had nothing to add.
4. The appellant represented himself at the hearing. I explained that as the Home Office had conceded their opposition to the case it was open to me to treat the appeal as withdrawn as per rule 17 of the 2008 Upper Tribunal Procedure Rules. The appellant consented to this approach, recognising that there was no need to pursue the appeal because he had been notified that he would be granted leave.
5. In such circumstances, given the agreement of the parties and the reasons for that agreement, I consent to the appeal being withdrawn.
Decision
Appeal withdrawn by consent.
Signed Date
Judge McCarthy
Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal