AA/10031/2015

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

The decision


IAC-AH-DN-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/10031/2015


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated

On 13th February 2017



Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KING TD


Between

[M N]
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant is a citizen of Albania born on 14th March 1995.
2. She appeals against the decision made on 26th June 2015, refusing her claim for asylum or other protection.
3. The hearing of that appeal came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Miller on 18th May 2016 and 31st August 2016. The appeal was dismissed.
4. Subsequently the appellant sought to challenge that decision on the grounds of appeal dated 6th November 2016.
5. It was conceded by the respondent that the appellant had indeed been a victim of trafficking and was in fear of recrimination from her family. At the First-tier Tribunal hearing the respondent was allowed to introduce fresh evidence. It is the case for the appellant that such fresh evidence ought not to have been admitted nor indeed should the Judge have permitted the respondent to withdraw the concessions that had been made at a previous hearing. On that basis the Upper Tribunal Judge concluded that it is arguable that a material error of law had indeed arisen in this case, such as to affect the fairness of the overall outcome.
6. In a notice of 21st December 2016 the respondent indicated that she did not oppose the application and invited the Tribunal to determine the appeal with a fresh oral hearing.
7. In the light of such matters Upper Tribunal Judge Kebede issued directions on 24th January 2017 indicating that the Tribunal was minded to allow the appeal and remit the matter to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing. She indicated that, in the absence of any objection to the above course by the close of business on 26th January 2017, the proposal would come into effect.
8. A letter was received from those representing the appellant, Malik & Malik on 24th January 2017 agreeing to the proposal that was advanced. No further communication has been received from the respondent.
9. In all the circumstances, therefore, her directions shall be acted upon. With the agreement of all parties that there is indeed a material error of law in the determination I set the decision by the First-tier Tribunal aside. I indicate that it would be appropriate in all the circumstances and by reference to the Senior President's Practice Direction that this matter should be remitted for a de novo hearing before the First-tier Tribunal. Any directions consequent to this order can be issued by the First-tier Tribunal.
10. In the circumstances the hearing of the matter which had been scheduled before the Upper Tribunal on 1st February 2017 can be vacated and effect given to the directions set out above.


Signed Date 27 Jan 2017

Upper Tribunal Judge King TD