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 >> EA114262016 [2018] UKAITUR EA114262016 (6 November 2018) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2018/EA114262016.html Cite as: [2018] UKAITUR EA114262016 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: EA/11426/2016
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
|
Heard at Birmingham CJC |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
|
On 16 October 2018 |
On 6 November 2018
|
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALLEN
Between
enoch boadi
(anonymity direction not made)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Mr O Sobowale, instructed by Quality Solicitors (AZ Law)
For the Respondent: Ms H Aboni, Home Office Presenting Officer
DECISION AND REASONS
1. This is the appeal of Mr Boadi against the decision of the First-tier Judge who, on 4 October 2017, dismissed his appeal against the respondent's refusal of his application for a residence card. I need not say very much in this judgment because it is common ground that the judge erred. She came to a number of positive findings which are helpfully summarised at paragraph 3 of the grounds of appeal concerning the validity of the marriage, the durable relationship and the marriage not being one of convenience. I am satisfied that the child is the appellant's child, and also of crucial importance to today's hearing the judge found that the sponsor was exercising treaty rights at the date of decision and that she was doing so also at the date of hearing.
2. The judge dismissed the appeal on the basis that the sponsor had been unemployed for a period of nearly six months earlier on in 2017 and as a consequence did not accept she had been continuously exercising treaty rights or that she continues, he being a qualified person, to do so.
3. The judge having accepted that the sponsor was working and exercising treaty rights at the date of decision and also doing so at the date of hearing was sufficient for the appeal to be allowed. It is an application for a residence card only, not for permanent residence, and as a consequence I am satisfied that the judge erred as a matter of law in this case and in light of her other findings and in light of the error now corrected with regard to the exercise of treaty rights, it must follow that the appeal which was dismissed by the judge is now allowed.
4. No anonymity direction is made.
Signed Date 06/11/2018
Upper Tribunal Judge Allen
