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 >> IA478742014 & ors [2016] UKAITUR IA478742014 (2 February 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2016/IA478742014.html Cite as: [2016] UKAITUR IA478742014 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: IA/47874/2014
IA/48009/2014
IA/48010/2014
|
Heard at Field House |
Decision and Reasons Promulgated |
|
On 13 January 2016 |
On 2 February 2016 |
|
|
|
Before
DEPUTY JUDGE DRABU CBE
Between
and
Mr ARSALAN SHAKEEL
MUHAMMAD AZHER TAYAB
WAJEEHA AKHTER AZHER
Respondents
Representation
For the Appellant: Mr P Duffy, Senior Presenting Officer
For the Respondent: Mr P Richardson of Morgan Malik Solicitors
1. This appeal has been brought by the Secretary of State. The respondents are citizens of Pakistan. Their appeal against the appellant's (the Secretary of State) decision refusing to vary leave to remain and to remove by way of directions under Section 47 of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 was allowed by Judge Cohen for reasons given in the determination promulgated on 3 July 2015 following a hearing on 18 June 2015 at Taylor House. For what follows in this determination, recitation of relevant facts in not necessary.
2. At the hearing before me Mr Duffy in his submissions invited me to find that the First Tier Judge Cohen had been misled by the appellant's reasons for refusal letter and had therefore allowed the appeal as a consequence. He asked that the appeal be allowed and remitted to the appellant to enable her to make a decision in accordance with the Law and the rules.
3. Mr Richardson for the respondents agreed with the submission made by Mr Duffy and agreed that the relief sought by him was in accord with the relevant case law on Fairness. He cited the case of Mushtaq 2015 UKUT 44 as well as the principles on fairness set out in decisions in Naved and Patel.
4. In the light of agreement by parties and my own view of the relevant facts, I allow this appeal of the Secretary of State and direct her to make a fresh decision that accords with the Law and rules.
K Drabu CBE
Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal.
23 January 2016
