Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA013952015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at : Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On : 14 June 2016
On : 15 June 2016

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEBEDE

Between

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Appellant
and

A R
(anonymity direction made)
Respondent

Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr T Wilding, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
For the Respondent: Ms C Fielden, instructed by Syed Shaheen Solicitors

DECISION AND REASONS

1. This is an appeal by the Secretary of State for the Home Department ("SSHD") against a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Zahed allowing AR's appeal, under the immigration rules, against the respondent's decision to refuse his asylum and human rights claim.

2. For the purposes of this decision, I shall refer to the Secretary of State as the respondent and AR as the appellant, reflecting their positions as they were in the appeal before the First-tier Tribunal.

3. The appellant is a national of Bangladesh born on 30 December 2000. He arrived in the United Kingdom on 20 October 2010 on a six month child accompanied visa, aged 9 years, together with his mother and sister. His mother left him in the UK with his uncle and returned to Bangladesh. On 15 June 2011 he made a human rights claim (Articles 3 and 8) which was refused on 16 September 2011 and then reconsidered and again refused on 7 February 2014.

4. The appellant appealed against that decision and his appeal was heard by First-tier Tribunal Judge Telford on 26 September 2014. In a decision promulgated on 26 November 2014, Judge Telford dismissed the appeal. In so doing, he rejected the appellant's claim to be at risk on return to Bangladesh due to a family dispute over inheritance, finding that there was no Article 3 risk. He also rejected the appellant's claim to have lost contact with his family in Bangladesh and found that since his close family remained in that country his removal would not be in breach of Article 8.

5. The appellant then made an asylum claim, on 10 April 2015. His claim was refused on 11 September 2015. He appealed against that decision and his appeal was heard in the First-tier Tribunal on 22 January 2016 and was dismissed in a decision promulgated on 18 April 2016.

6. In dismissing the appellant's appeal, First-tier Tribunal Judge Zahed endorsed Judge Telford's decision in respect to risk on return to Bangladesh and dismissed the appellant's asylum appeal. However he allowed the appeal under the Immigration Rules, on the basis that the appellant met the requirements of paragraph 352ZC as an unaccompanied child.

7. Permission to appeal was sought by the respondent on the grounds that the judge had no jurisdiction to allow the appeal on the ground that he did, as that was no longer a ground of appeal under the amended section 84 of the Nationality, Immigration Asylum Act 2002; and that, in light of the previous findings made by Judge Telford, the judge had failed to give reasons for his finding that there were no adequate reception arrangements for the appellant in Bangladesh.

8. Permission to appeal was granted on 10 May 2016.

9. At the hearing the parties were in agreement that Judge Zahed had made a material error of law by allowing the appeal on the basis that he did, as he had no jurisdiction to do so under the amended provisions of section 84. I therefore set aside his decision.

10. Ms Fielden submitted that the appellant would be pursuing his appeal on Article 8 grounds. Whilst Judge Zahed had recorded at [12] that the appellant's claim was not being advanced before him on that basis, Mr Wilding accepted that it would be wrong, given the appellant's age, to prevent him from having an opportunity to put forward his Article 8 claim. He considered that the appropriate course would be for the appellant's case to be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing, since no proper findings of fact had been made. As the parties were in agreement I therefore decided to remit the matter.

DECISION

11. The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error on a point of law. The decision is set aside. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal, to be dealt with afresh, pursuant to section 12(2)(b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and Practice Statement 7.2(b), before any judge aside from Judge Telford and Judge Zahed.

Anonymity

The First-tier Tribunal made an anonymity order. I uphold that order, pursuant to Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/269).

Signed

Upper Tribunal Judge Kebede

Date 15th June 2016