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

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: UI-2021-001735

PA/00211/2021

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

	Decided on the Papers Pursuant to Rule 34 On the 15 th November 2022
	Decision & Reasons Promulgated On the 28 November 2022

 

Before

 

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEITH

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE BLUNDELL

 

 

Between

 

'NCH' (JAMAICA)

(ANONYMITY DIRECTION CONTINUED)

Appellant

and

 

The secretary of State for the Home department

Respondent

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

1.              This decision in respect of the appellant's appeal is made on the papers pursuant to Rule 34 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008. The context in doing so is set out in the background below.

Background

2.              On 24 ^th November 2021, the appellant appealed the decision of Judge Scott, promulgated on 28 ^th October 2021, in which she dismissed the appellant's appeal on asylum, humanitarian and human rights grounds. FtT Judge Cox granted permission on all grounds on 23 ^rd December 2021.

3.              In her rule 24 response, the respondent accepts that the FtT materially erred in concluding that the appellant's article 8 claim amounted to a 'new matter' requiring the respondent's consent, such that the FtT did not have jurisdiction to hear that claim (paragraph [27] of the decision).

4.              The parties have agreed that the appeal should be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal, other than Judge Scott, to consider and decide the appellant's article 8 appeal afresh. The parties further agree that there has been no challenge to Judge Scott's findings in relation to section 72 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and exclusion from humanitarian protection; and the appellant's article 3 claim. They also agree that Judge Scott's findings at paragraphs [56] to [58], [64] and [69] should be preserved. Finally, they have agreed that there should be an opportunity to adduce updated evidence on the remaining article 8 appeal.

5.              Pursuant to Rule 34, we have taken into account the views expressed by both parties that a hearing is unnecessary, before making a decision. In light of their agreement on that issue, and their agreement on the scope of remission to the FtT, we are satisfied that it is appropriate to determine this appeal without a hearing. We therefore proceed to consider and determine this appeal on the papers, by allowing the appellant's appeal.

 

Notice of Decision

Judge Scott's decision promulgated on 28 ^th October 2022 contains errors of law in relation to article 8 ECHR. We set aside her decision in respect of article 8. Her decisions in respect of the protection and article 3 claims are undisturbed.

We remit the appellant's appeal on article 8 grounds to the First-tier Tribunal for a rehearing, subject to the preserved findings at paragraphs [56] to [58], [64] and [69] of Judge Scott's decision.

The remitted appeal shall not be heard by Judge Scott.

The anonymity directions continue to apply.

 

 

Signed: J Keith

 

Upper Tribunal Judge Keith

 

Dated: 15 ^th November 2022