Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/29515/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Manchester
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On January 10, 2017
On January 13, 2017

Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALIS

Between

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Appellant
and

MRS YING ZHEUNG
(NO ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Respondent

Representation:
Appellant Mr Harrison (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)
Respondent Mr Ahmed, Counsel, instructed by AGI Solicitors

DECISION AND REASONS
1. The respondent in these proceedings was the appellant before the First-tier Tribunal. From hereon I have referred to the parties as they were in the First-tier Tribunal so that for example reference to the respondent is a reference to the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
2. I do not make an anonymity order under rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/2698 as amended).
3. The appellant is a national of China. On July 16, 2014 the appellant applied for leave to remain on human rights grounds. The respondent refused her application on August 20, 2015 and gave a direction for her removal under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
4. The appellant appealed that decision on August 27, 2015 under Section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and her appeal came before Designated Judge of the First-tier Tribunal McClure and Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Durance (hereinafter referred to as "the Panel" on April 13, 2016. In a decision promulgated on May 16, 2016 they allowed the appeal on human rights grounds.
5. The respondent appealed the Panel's decision on May 31, 2016 and permission to appeal was granted by Designated Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Woodcraft on September 27, 2016. He found that it was arguable the Panel had erred by not applying the Immigration Rules but instead allowing the appeal under the principles set out in Sanade and others (British children-Zambrano-Dereci) [2012] UKUT 48 (IAC).
6. The matter came before me on the above date and on that occasion I heard submissions from both representatives.
PRELIMINARY ISSUES
7. In Sanade and others (British children - Zambrano - Dereci) [2012] UKUT 00048 (IAC) the Tribunal held that Ruiz Zambrano [2011] EUECJ C-34/09 "now makes it clear that where the child or indeed the remaining spouse is a British citizen and therefore a citizen of the European Union, as a matter of EU law it is not possible to require the family as a unit to relocate outside of the European Union or for the Secretary of State to submit that it would be reasonable for them to do so".
8. I raised with Mr Harrison whether the decision of Sanade was no longer good law because effectively that was what his colleague's grounds of appeal raised.
9. Mr Harrison agreed that there was nothing in the changes brought about by the Immigration Act 2014 that altered the effect of the Tribunal's decision in Sanade. That case remained good law.
10. It therefore followed that it was open to the Panel to reach the conclusion that it did in this appeal and consequently, by agreement, there was no error in law.
DECISION
11. The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did not involve the making of an error on a point of law. I uphold the decision.

Signed: Dated:

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis

TO THE RESPONDENT
FEE AWARD
I uphold the fee award made.

Signed: Dated:

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis