HU/02514/2015 & HU/02517/2015

  • 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: HU/02514/2015
hu/02517/2015


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Bradford
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 2 February 2017
On 2 February 2017


Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE SAFFER


Between

MARIATU DUMBUYA
M MAH DUMBUYA
(NO ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellants
and

ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER - SHEFO
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellants: Miss Pickering of Counsel
For the Respondent: Mrs Petterson a Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS
Background
1. The Respondent refused the Appellants' applications for leave to enter as the children of a person present and settled here on 16 July 2015. Their appeal against this was dismissed by First-tier Tribunal Judge Khan ("the Judge") following a hearing on 21 July 2016.
2. In summary the Judge found that the Appellants had not established that their father here had sole responsibility for them following the death of their mother in 2008.
The grant of permission
3. Judge Froom granted permission to appeal (23 November 2016) on the ground that it is arguable that the Judge erred in misapplying the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC 395 ("the rules").
Respondent's position
4. Mrs Petterson agreed that the Judge materially erred in not considering [297(i)(d)] of the rules and consequently [297(iii) - (v)], as, given it was found that their mother had died, this alternative avenue was open to them beyond [297(f)] which was the only rule considered by the Judge.
Discussion
5. Given the concession made by Mrs Petterson, I am satisfied that a material error of law occurred. Both representatives agreed that given this clear error, and the lack of any findings on the matters identified in [297(iii) - (v)], it was appropriate for the case to be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for it to be heard afresh by a Judge other than Judge Khan.
Decision:
The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did involve the making of an error on a point of law.
I set aside the decision.
I remit the matter to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard by a Judge other than Judge MA Khan.



Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Saffer
2 February 2017