EA/03961/2020

  • 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: UI-2021-001345
EA/03961/2020

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Done without a hearing at Field House
On 1 June 2022
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On the 13 July 2022





Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PERKINS


Between

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Appellant
and

SERVGI URKŞAŞ
Respondent
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The Secretary of State appeals a decision of the First-tier Tribunal to allow the appeal of the respondent, hereinafter “the claimant”, against a decision of the Secretary of State to refuse her a residence card certifying her derivative right of residence.
2. The claimant has taken legal advice and has chosen to disclose a “Response to Grant of Permission” from Mr Raphael Jesurum of counsel substantially agreeing with the Secretary of State's criticisms and suggesting that the Secretary of State’s appeal be allowed and remitted to be heard in the First-tier Tribunal. The substance of the criticism is that the reasoning is unlawfully thin.
3. The claimant accepts counsel’s advice and agrees with the suggested disposal.
4. I have received too an e-mail from Mr P. Deller, a SEO with the Specialists Appeals Team agreeing with counsel’s suggestion.
5. Rule 34 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 provides:
Decision with or without a hearing
34. (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the Upper Tribunal may make any decision without a hearing.
(2) The Upper Tribunal must have regard to any view expressed by a party when deciding whether to hold a hearing to consider any matter, and the form of any such hearing.
6. Having regard to the express views of the parties I determine the appeal without a hearing.
7. I find that the First-tier Tribunal erred in law by failing to explain its decision properly. I set aside its decision and I direct that the appeal be heard again in the First-tier Tribunal.
8. I am grateful to the claimant for her very responsible approach to this appeal.
Notice of Decision
9. The First-tier Tribunal erred in law. I set aside its decision and direct that the appeal be determined again in the First-tier Tribunal.

Jonathan Perkins

Signed

Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Dated 1 June 2022