EA/01921/2015

  • 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: EA/01921/2015


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Manchester
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 4th October 2016
On 5th October 2016



Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MARTIN


Between

MR FAWAD MUHAMMAD
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr M Khan (Parkview Solicitors)
For the Respondent: Mrs R Pettersen (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)


DECISION AND REASONS

1. This is an appeal to the Upper Tribunal, with permission, by the Appellant in relation to a Decision and Reasons of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Hudson) promulgated on 23rd February 2016 by which she dismissed the Appellant's appeal against the Secretary of State's decision to refuse to issue him with a Residence card as an extended family member of an EEA national exercising Treaty Rights in the UK.

2. Permission to appeal was granted on 8th August 2016.

3. However on 19th September 2016 the Upper Tribunal published its decision in Sala (EFMs: Right of Appeal) [2016] UKUT 00411 (IAC) which found that extended family members have no right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal.

4. I was somewhat surprised that, in light of Sala, Mr Khan pursued this matter. However he did. He also submitted a small bundle of additional evidence explaining that, since the First-tier Tribunal's decision, the situation had altered in that the Appellant and his partner were now married. That is of course irrelevant to the decision made by the First-tier Tribunal in this case. The First-tier Tribunal was deciding an application by an extended family member. If the Appellant is now a family member the appropriate course is a fresh application under the EEA Regulations.

5. In light of Sala and in line with it I find as follows:

6. The Appellant has no right of appeal. The First-tier Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. It erred in law in doing so.

7. I set aside its decision and substitute a decision that there was not a valid appeal before the First-tier Tribunal.




Signed Date 4th October 2016

Upper Tribunal Judge Martin