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

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: HU/09339/2016

HU/05889/2016

HU/05908/2016

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at Manchester
On 26 th July 2018, typed, corrected Signed and sent to Promulgation On 1 st August 2018.	Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 14 th August 2018

 

Before

 

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley

 

 

Between

 

Zakaria [A]

Farhana [J]

[S A]

(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE )

Appellants

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

For the Appellants: Mr Muquit of Counsel, instructed by Taj Solicitors

For the Respondent: Mr Tan, a Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

 

 

DETERMINATION AND REASONS

 

 

1. This is an appeal against the respondent's decision to refuse the appellants' application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom on the grounds that their removal would not place the United Kingdom in breach of its obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998 and to give directions for their removal from the United Kingdom.

 

2. The first-named appellant is a national of Bangladesh who was born on 30 ^th January, 1980 and the second and third appellants are his dependent wife and child, born on 31 ^st May, 1989 and 24 ^th November, 2014 respectively. Following the respondent's refusal, the appellants appealed and their appeal was heard at Taylor House on 27 ^th July last year by First-tier Tribunal Judge Devittie. His decision was to dismiss the appellants' appeals under the Immigration Rules and on human rights grounds. His determination was challenged on the basis that the Tribunal had failed to have regard to Home Office policy at the date of the appeal ( SF and others (Guidance, post-2014 Act) Albania [2017] UKUT 120 (IAC) applies).

 

3. At the hearing before me today, Mr Tan accepted that both the respondent and the judge had erred in failing to apply the Home Office policy and had the policy been applied, the appeal would have been allowed. He agreed that I should allow the appeal in this determination, which I am happy to do.

 

4. I find that the determination of Mr Devittie did contain an error of law and I set it aside. I remake the decision and as requested by the Home Office Presenting Officer, I allow the appellants' appeals.

 

Notice of Decision

 

The appeal is allowed.

 

No anonymity direction is made.

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley

 

 

 

 

TO THE RESPONDENT

FEE AWARD

 

Any fee the appellants paid when they made their application should be repaid to them in full.

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley