AA/05947/2015

  • Case title:  
  • Appellant name:
  • Status of case: Unreported
  • Hearing date:
  • Promulgation date:
  • Publication date:
  • Last updated on:
  • Country:
  • Judges:

The decision



Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/05947/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

At Field House, on papers
Decision Promulgated On
18th October 2016
19th October 2016



Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CANAVAN


Between

ABOLFAZL [S]
(anonymity direction NOT MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


DECISION AND DIRECTIONS

Rule 40 - The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

1. The appellant appealed against the respondent's decision to refuse a protection claim. First-tier Tribunal Judge Handley dismissed the appeal in a decision promulgated on 01 June 2015.

2. The Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal on the ground that it was arguable that the First-tier Tribunal erred in failing to consider material evidence from the Stockton Parish Church.

3. The appeal was listed for hearing on 07 March 2016 before Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Archer. The judge's note of the proceedings indicates that he gave an oral decision at the hearing. He found that the First-tier Tribunal's failure to consider a piece of evidence that was material to a proper determination of the appeal amounted to an error of law and remitted the case to the First-tier Tribunal.

4. Unfortunately, the judge died before he could prepare a written decision after the hearing.

5. Rule 40 of The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 allows the Upper Tribunal to give a decision orally at a hearing. Rule 40(3) states that the Upper Tribunal must provide written reasons with a decision notice to each party as soon as reasonably practicable after making a decision which finally disposes of all issues in the proceedings. For obvious reasons it is not possible for a decision and reasons notice to be sent out by the judge in this case.

6. Rule 40(3) provides exceptions to the rule if the parties have consented to the Upper Tribunal not giving written reasons.

7. The overriding objective contained in rule 2 requires the Upper Tribunal to deal with cases fairly and justly, including avoiding delay. Both parties were represented at the hearing and should have a record of the oral decision given by the judge.

8. Pursuant to the overriding objective the Upper Tribunal proposes to treat this decision as a notice of decision confirming the decision made by Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Archer subject to any objections made by the parties within 14 days of the date this decision notice is sent.

9. If no objections are received after 14 days the Upper Tribunal will treat the parties as having consented to the Upper Tribunal not giving written reasons under rule 40(3)(b) and the appeal will be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh hearing.

DECISION

Subject to paragraph 8 above

The First-tier Tribunal decision involved the making of an error on a point of law

The decision is set aside and is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh hearing


Signed Date 18 October 2016

Upper Tribunal Judge Canavan