IA/44795/2014

  • 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: IA447952014

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 7 June 2016
On 10th June 2016



Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE SAFFER

Between

NKIRU FRANCISCA EWURUM
(NO ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)

Appellant
And

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr Slater of Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr Walker a Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS

Background

1. The Respondent refused the Appellant's application for leave to remain on 31 October 2014. Her appeal was dismissed by First-tier Tribunal Judge Kanagaratnam ("the Judge") following a hearing on 4 September 2015.

The grant of permission

2. Upper Tribunal Judge Grubb granted permission to appeal (29 April 2016), in essence, stating that it is arguable that the Judge did not consider relevant evidence relating to domestic violence.

Discussion

3. Mr Walker, despite the rule 24 notice, accepted the aforementioned and that this amounted to a material error of law. He conceded that depending on the factual matrix that was accepted, and assuming all relevant facts were considered, compelling circumstances could exist such as to mean that Article 8 was engaged, and that those facts (if accepted) could meet the reasonableness test required by Article 8. He conceded that the decision could not stand and the mater should be remitted to the reheard de novo by a Judge other than Judge Kanagaratnam in the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo. Given these concessions, with which I agreed and given Mr Slater's helpful submissions, it is un-necessary for me to recite any of the facts as they will need to be determined afresh.

4. There was a material error of law. I set the decision aside.

Decision:

The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did involve the making of an error on a point of law.

I set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal.

The matter shall be remitted to the Fust-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing to be heard by a Judge other than Judge Kanagaratnam.




Signed:
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Saffer
7 June 2016