OA/14177/2013

• Status of case: Unreported
• Hearing date: 10 Sep 2014
• Promulgation date: 19 Sep 2014
• Publication date: 13 Jan 2015
• Last updated on: 13 Jan 2015

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: OA/14177/2013


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Bradford
Determination Promulgated
On 10 September 2014
On 19 September 2014




Before


UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE D E TAYLOR


Between


RUNA BEGUM
Appellant
And

ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER
Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr A Bashir, Bashir Consultancy
For the Respondent: Mr Diwncyz, HOPO

DETERMINATION AND REASONS


1. This appeal came before Judge Turnock on 16 May 2014.
2. Two days before the hearing, in breach of directions, the respondent served additional evidence which the judge decided to admit, although he gave no reason in the determination for doing so. The appellant sought an adjournment to address the points arising from that evidence which the judge refused.
3. The grounds argue that he acted in a manner which was procedurally unfair by depriving the appellant of an opportunity to adduce any documentary evidence in reply.
4. Furthermore the judge took into account redacted material upon which the presenting officer said that she did not wish to rely.
5. Permission to appeal was granted. Mr Diwncyz, for the respondent, did not wish to defend the determination and said that he had no objection to a remittal.
6. The determination is characteristically thorough and well reasoned, but I find that the judge did err in law for the reasons set out above, and his actions deprived the appellant of a full opportunity to put his case.
7. The appeal should be reheard by a differently constituted first-tier tribunal, not to include Judge Turnock at Bradford.



Signed Date


Judge of the Upper Tribunal