IA/25348/2015

  • 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: IA/25348/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 26 October 2017
On 8 November 2017


Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE NORTON-TAYLOR

Between

Umbreen Pervaz
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr S Ahmed, Counsel, instructed by 12 Bridge Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr P Duffy, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS
1. I shall refer to the parties as they were before the First-tier Tribunal. The Secretary of State is the Respondent, and Mrs Pervaz the Appellant. This is a challenge by the Respondent against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Majid (the judge), promulgated on 10 February 2017, in which he allowed the Appellant's appeal against the Respondent's decision of 22 October 2015, which had refused her application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom.



The Judge's Decision
2. The judge sets out the general background to the Appellant's case at paragraphs 11 to 12 of his decision. The totality of findings and conclusions are contained in a brief passage in paragraph 26.

Grounds of Appeal and Grant of Permission
3. The grounds of appeal simply assert that the judge has failed to make any reasoned findings of fact whatsoever. Permission to appeal was granted by First-tier Tribunal Judge Osborne on 22 August 2017.

The Hearing before Me
4. Mr Duffy relied upon the grounds of appeal. Mr Ahmed attempted to defend the judge's decision by suggesting that he had had all relevant matters in mind when reaching his overall conclusions in paragraph 26.

Decision on Error of Law
5. The judge's decision is wholly inadequate. There are no findings of fact, no reasons, and no sustainable conclusions whatsoever. I set aside the decision.
Disposal
6. Both representatives were agreed that if errors of law were found this appeal must be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal. I entirely agree. There have been no findings of fact in this case and everything needs to be looked at again.

Notice of Decision
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal contains material errors of law and I therefore set it aside.
This appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a complete rehearing.
No anonymity direction is made.
Signed Date: 6 November 2017
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Norton-Taylor