Tribunal decisions

The decision

The Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal number: IA/21613/2014
IA/21612/2014
IA/21614/2014

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House
Promulgated
On November 9, 2016
On November 11, 2016

Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALIS

Between

Obinna [C]
[KC]
[AC]
(NO ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Appellants
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondents

Representation:
Appellant Mr Plowright, Counsel, instructed by Nasim and Co Solicitors
Respondent Mr Bramble (Home Office Presenting Officer)

DECISION AND REASONS

1. The appellants, citizens of Nigeria, applied for leave to remain on September 11, 2012 on the grounds that removal would place the United Kingdom in breach of its obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998 The respondent refused their applications on April 30, 2014 and gave directions under section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 for removal from the United Kingdom.

2. The appellants appealed those decisions on May 14, 2014 under section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

3. The appeals came before Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Adio on June 3, 2015 and in a decision promulgated on June 25, 2015 he allowed the second-named appellant's appeal under the Immigration Rules and the first and third-named appellants' appeals under ECHR legislation.

4. The respondent sought permission to appeal that decision on July 2, 2015 on the grounds the Tribunal had failed to provide adequate reasons on a material matter and/or by making a material misdirection of law. Judge of the first-tier Tribunal Andrew granted permission to appeal on October 6, 2015. The matter came before me on January 8, 2016 and I accepted on that date there was an error in law.

5. The case was adjourned and next came before me on March 31, 2016 and on that date a new issue was raised. In short, it was now argued that the first-named appellant was the husband of an EEA national and as his wife had been here continuously for more than five years and exercising treaty rights then the first-named appellant would be entitled to permanent residence under Regulation 15 of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006.

6. I gave directions for service of evidence and that included provision for the respondent to obtain evidence from HMRC about the first-named appellant's wife's financial circumstances under Section 40 of the UK Borders Act 2007.

7. A statement has now been received from HMRC dated September 19, 2016. That document confirms the first-named appellant's wife has been exercising treaty rights in this country for five continuous years.

8. In the circumstances Mr Bramble, on behalf of the respondent, accepted the first-named appellant satisfied Regulation 16 of the 2006 Regulations. I therefore allow his appeal.

9. In relation to the second and third named appellants I treat their appeals as abandoned under Rule 17A of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008. They have each been granted leave to remain in the United Kingdom as British citizens and under Rule 17A(1) their appeals are treated as being abandoned.

10. The First-tier Tribunal did not make an anonymity direction and pursuant to Rule 14 of The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 I see no reason to make an order now.

DECISION

11. There was a material error and I set aside the earlier decisions.

12. I allow the first-named appellant's appeal under the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006.

13. The appeals of the second and third named appellants are treated as abandoned under Rule 17A of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008.

Signed: Dated: 11 August y

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis

FEE AWARD
TO THE RESPONDENT

I make no fee award as I have allowed the appeal on grounds not presented to the respondent at the time of the application.

Signed: Dated: 11 August y

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis