OA/05475/2015 & Ors.

  • Case title:  
  • Appellant name:
  • Status of case: Unreported
  • Hearing date:
  • Promulgation date:
  • Publication date:
  • Last updated on:
  • Country:
  • Judges:

The decision


IAC-FH-AR-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: OA/05475/2015
OA/06575/2015
OA/06581/2015


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 8 September 2016
On 28 November 2016



Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CHANA


Between

SHAHBAZ [Q]
[S S1]
[S S2]
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellants
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Miss P Glass, Counsel, instructed by Abbott Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr N Bramble, Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellants are nationals of Pakistan who appealed against the decision of the Entry Clearance Officer made in Islamabad on 17 February 2015 to refuse their applications for entry clearance as partner and dependants under Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules.
2. The judge dismissed the appellants' appeals and permission to appeal was granted by Designated First-tier Tribunal Judge McCarthy in a decision dated 29 July 2016.
3. The First-tier Tribunal Judge found that the appellants do not meet the requirements of Appendix FM as they have not provided bank statements for a period of six months up to the date of the appellants' application of 30 October 2014 and dismissed the appeal.
4. At the hearing Mr Bramble very helpfully accepted that there is an error of law in the decision and that if one was to consider the reasons for refusal letter, all the issues raised therein have been satisfied by the appellant.
5. One of the issue in this appeal was whether there is a subsisting relationship and this has been satisfied because the ECM accepted that there was a subsisting relationship. The ECM further accepted that funds came from the sale of property. The only other issue was whether the bank statements had been provided for six months prior to the application made on 30 October 2014. This has also been satisfied because the statements for the required six months' have been produced. I therefore find that all the concerns of the respondent have been met. This was not disputed by the Senior Presenting Officer.
Notice of Decision
6. I therefore set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal as having a material error of law. I remake the decision and allow the appellants appeals under the Immigration Rules. This is a linked appeal and there are three appellants. The appeals of all three appellants are allowed.
No anonymity direction is made.

Signed Date: 24th day of November 2016

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Chana



TO THE RESPONDENT
FEE AWARD

Even though I have allowed the appeal, I make no fee order.

Signed Date 24th day of November 2016

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Chana