United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00377/2017

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at Glasgow		Decisions & Reasons Promulgated
On 5 March 2018		On 26 April 2018l

 

Before

 

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MACLEMAN

 

 

Between

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Appellant

and

 

PATRYK TROCKI

Respondent

 

 

Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr M Diwyncz, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

For the Respondent: Mr A Caskie, Advocate, instructed by Chung & Rea, Solicitors

 

 

DETERMINATION AND REASONS

1.              The SSHD appeals against a decision by FtT Judge Cox, promulgated on 3 November 2017, allowing the appellant's appeal against deportation under the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2016.

2.              The SSHD's grounds of appeal to the UT are stated in her application dated 10 November 2017.

3.              A rule 24 response for Mr Trocki submits that the matters in the grounds were addressed in the judge's decision; there is no suggestion that it was perverse; the grounds suggest that the judge failed to have regard to relevant matters, when he patently did; and the judge was entitled to conclude as he did for the reasons he gave.

4.              Mr Diwyncz accepted that the decision was not said and could not be said to be perverse. He was unable to show that the decision fails to give reasons for its findings, or fails to resolve any material conflict, those being the terms in which the alleged errors are summed up at paragraph 5 of the grounds.

5.              I indicated that the appeal to the UT would be dismissed.

6.              The features on the SSHD's side mentioned in the grounds are strong ones, but they were all dealt with by the judge in a clear-eyed fashion. They are not minimised. There were also sensible considerations on the other side.

7.              This was a finely balanced case, which might readily have been decided either way, but the grounds are no more than disagreement with the judge coming down on the side he did. The grounds disclose no error on a point of law.

8.              The decision of the First-tier Tribunal shall stand.

9.              No anonymity direction has been requested or made.

 

 

6 March 2018

Upper Tribunal Judge Macleman