HU/12575/2018

  • 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/12575/2018


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Birmingham Iac (Priory Courts)
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 3 June 2019
On 12 July 2019



Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DAVEY


Between

Mrs Ranjit Kaur
(anonymity ORDER NOT MADE)
Appellant
and

THE Secretary of State FOR THE Home Department
Respondent


Appearances:
For the Appellant: Mr Thathall, Counsel
For the Respondent: Mrs H Aboni, Senior Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS

1. The Appellant, a national of India, date of birth 26 June 1957, appealed against the Respondent's decision, dated 19 May 2018, to refuse leave to remain on human rights grounds.
2. Her appeal came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Taylor (the Judge), who dismissed the appeal on 9 October 2018. Permission to appeal was given by First-tier Tribunal Judge Swaney on 22 November 2018.
3. The judge said in granting permission, at paragraph 3
"The judge has focused on whether or not the Appellant is a 'family member'. Arguably this approach is flawed, as the question to be answered is whether or not the Appellant enjoys family life with her son, daughter-in-law and grandchildren. It is not necessary for the Appellant to be a 'parent' for the purposes of enjoying family life and she is plainly a member of her son's family. The judge has not made reference to the guidance on how the existence of family life is established between family members other than spouse/partner and minor children (Kugathas v SSHD [2003] EWCA Civ 31)."
4. I conclude, having read the judge's decision, that the judge had failed correctly to address the relationship between the Appellant, as a grandparent and the children as well as with her own children. In doing so the judge had failed to consider the significance of the impact of her being required to leave, both on the family and for her own part in being separated from her grandchildren.
5. In these circumstances I concluded the appropriate course was that the matter should be entirely remade. Trying to save findings of fact would impede an effective reconsideration of the matter.

DECISION
The appeal is allowed to the extent that the matter is returned to the First-tier Tribunal. The Original Tribunal's decision does not stand.

ANONYMITY ORDER
No anonymity order was sought nor is one was required.

DIRECTIONS
1. List for hearing in the First-tier Tribunal.
2. All documentation relied upon to be updated not less than ten clear working days before the resumed hearing.
3. Any other directions to be sought in the First-tier Tribunal.
4. List at Nottingham Justice Centre, not before First-tier Tribunal Judge I F Taylor.




Signed Date 24 June 2019


Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Davey