Tribunal decisions

The decision

IAC-AH-sc-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/03849/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 21 October 2016
On 9 November 2016

Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE RAMSHAW

Between

mr Suman Kanagaratnam
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Ms A Benfield of Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr L Tarlow, a Home Office Presenting Officer

DECISION AND REASONS
Introduction
1. This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Housego which was promulgated on 12 May 2016. The First-tier Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Secretary of State's decision to refuse to issue a residence card under the European Economic Area Regulations 2006.

Background
2. The appellant is a citizen of Sri Lanka who was born on 16 March 1985. The appellant applied for a residence card under Regulation 8(2) and 8(3) of the EEA Regulations as an extended family member of an EEA national exercising treaty rights in the United Kingdom. The respondent refused to issue a residence card. He appealed against the respondent's refusal to the First-tier Tribunal.
3. The First-tier Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal finding that the evidence of the appellant and the sponsor was not credible, the medical evidence could not be relied upon to any material degree and that there was no independent support for the evidence of the appellant and the sponsor about the care provided. The First-tier Tribunal also found that the sponsor did not support the appellant financially whilst the appellant was in Sri Lanka.
4. The appellant applied for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. On 20 September 2016 First-tier Tribunal Shimmin granted the appellant permission to appeal. Thus the appeal came before me.
Appeal to the Upper Tribunal
5. At the outset of the hearing Ms Benfield indicated that she and Mr Tarlow had discussed the appeal. Ms Benfield referred to the recently released Upper Tribunal decision in the case of Sala (EFMs: right of appeal) [2016] UKUT 411 (IAC). Ms Benfield accepted in light of the decision in the case of Sala the First-tier Tribunal had erred in law because it had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the decision of the Secretary of State not to grant a residence card to an extended family member. She indicated that it was accepted that no other application can be made in respect of this appeal. As the appellant has no right of appeal this is the end of the natter for the appellant.
6. Mr Tarlow indicated that he could not add anything to Ms Benfield's submissions.
Discussion
7. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal must be set aside because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appellant's appeal. As set out in Sala extended family members do not have an entitlement to a residence card and therefore the rights of appeal do not extend to appeals against a decision not to issue a residence card to extended family members falling within Regulation 8 of the EEA Regulations 2006.
8. The appellant had no right of appeal. The First-tier Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. It therefore erred in law in entertaining the appeal.
9. I set aside the First-tier Tribunal decision and substitute a decision that there was not a valid appeal before the First-tier Tribunal. The decision of the Secretary of State stands.

No anonymity direction is made.

Signed P M Ramshaw Date 8 November 2016

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Ramshaw