Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
Appeal Number: UI-2021-000678
EA/04170/2020

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On the 30 June 2022
On the 08 July 2022

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE BIRD
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE BLUNDELL

Between

SYED SHAMIKH SHABBIR
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)
Appellant
and

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr J Plowright, instructed by Direct Access
For the Respondent: Ms A Ahmed, Senior Presenting Officer

DECISION AND REASONS

1. The appellant is a citizen of Pakistan. On 29 July 2020, the respondent refused his application for an EEA family permit as an extended family member of an EEA national in the United Kingdom. The appeal was dismissed by FTT Judge Heaven on 19 July 2021 following a determination on the papers alone.

2. At paragraph 13 of the decision the Judge records that she had before her two witness statements. One from the appellant’s uncle Syed Nadeem Alam and one from the appellant’s father Syed Shabbir Alam. She notes that “no further evidence” was before her.

Grounds of Appeal

3. In short, the appellant says that he submitted further evidence to the Tribunal on 14 September 2021 by email. It comprised an 83-page bundle. The email was acknowledged by the Tribunal, but the bundle was not considered by the Judge.

4. Permission was granted by UTJ Kebede on 23 March 2022. She directed that within 14 days the appellant was to “file with the Upper Tribunal and serve on the respondent a copy of the 83-page bundle which it is claimed was before the First-tier Tribunal Judge and evidence to show that it was sent to the court on 14 September 2020. Such evidence must consist of more than the auto-reply acknowledgement of receipt already referred to.”

The Appeal

5. We were shown an email from the appellant to the Upper Tribunal sent at 3.31am on Monday 14 September 2020 in the following terms:

Dear Sirs,

Appeal No: EA/04170/2020
Re: Syed Shamikh Shabbir 25 April 1996 Pakistan

Further to the appeal application submitted. Please find attached Grounds along with the supporting documents for the attention of the immigration Judge.

Kindly link these submissions with the afforementioned (sic.) appeal.

Yours sincerely,
Syed Shamikh Shabbir

6. The email had a pdf file attached. The file is named “FINAL APPEAL BUNDLE.pdf.” We noted that the appeal reference quoted in the email is correct and relates to the appellant’s appeal.

7. We were also shown the auto-reply acknowledgment referred to in UTJ Kebede’s direction. It is timed at 3.31am on Monday 14 September 2020. And sets out the following:

Thank you for submitting your appeal to the Immigration and Asylum Chamber (IAC). We have received your email and your appeal will be logged within 10 working days. You can find more information about appealing against a visa or immigration decision here: https://www.gov.uk/immigration-asylum-tribunal. This inbox is only for new appeals and all other enquiries should be send to customer.service@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk.

Discussion

8. We are satisfied that the direction has been complied with. No issue was taken with timing.

9. The respondent helpfully and properly accepted that the 83-page bundle contained evidence that the Judge would have regarded as material. We need not therefore deal with the content of the bundle.

10. The appellant has a right to have his appeal heard on the basis of the evidence he has submitted. We are satisfied that, by reason of administrative oversight, the 83-page bundle filed by the appellant was not before the Judge when she made her decision.

Disposition

We are satisfied that the interests of justice require that the appeal is allowed.
The matter will be remitted to the First Tribunal for a fresh decision.

No anonymity direction is made.

HHJ Bird

6 July 2022