HU/11191/2016

  • 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/11191/2016


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
On: 2 October 2018
Decision and reasons Promulgated
On: 31 October 2018




Before

DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL CHANA


Between

MR PHURIWAT VICHIENARAT
(anonymity direction not made)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:
For the appellant: Mr S Bellara of Counsel
For the respondent: Ms A Everett, Senior Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant, a citizen of Thailand, appealed against the decision of the respondent, refusing to Tim further leave to remain in the United Kingdom under Appendix FM of the immigration rules and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. First-tier Tribunal Judge C Greasely dismissed the appellant's appeal in a decision promulgated on 20 April 2018.
2. Permission to appeal was granted by First-tier Tribunal Judge PJM Hollingworth on 13 August 2018 stating that it is arguable that unfairness has been seen to arise because the appellant was not represented at the hearing because is Counsel was not able to attend.
3. At the hearing there was no dispute that unfairness had risen because the appellant was not represented at the hearing as Counsel was not able to attend due to a family bereavement and was urgently required to fly abroad with his wife and daughter. The solicitors for the appellant had sent a fax on the morning of the hearing and Counsel had telephoned the appellant on the morning of the hearing telling him he could not attend the hearing. Mr Bellara said that it was the Easter break and therefore it was not possible to instruct an alternative Counsel.
4. The appellant is entitled to legal representation and through no fault of his he was not able to receive it at the hearing. The appellant's legal representatives took all due steps to inform the Tribunal that Counsel could not attend the hearing. In the circumstances the appeal hearing should have been adjourned. As a consequence, unfairness has resulted.
5. In the circumstances, I direct that the appeal be placed before any First-tier Tribunal Judge apart from first-tier Tribunal Judge C Greasly for the appeal to be heard de novo.
Decision
Appeal remitted to the First-tier Tribunal

Signed by

A Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal

Ms S Chana Dated this 23rd day of October 2018