UI-2025-000124

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

The decision



IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER
Case No: UI-2025-000124
First-tier Tribunal No: HU/52739/2024


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Decision & Reasons Issued:

On 19th of January 2026

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LANE


Between

EBK
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellant
and

ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER-Sheffield
Respondent

Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr Shabbir
For the Respondent: Mr Mullen, Senior Presenting Officer

Heard at Edinburgh on 14 January 2026



Order Regarding Anonymity

Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the appellant is granted anonymity.

No-one shall publish or reveal any information, including the name or address of the appellant, likely to lead members of the public to identify the appellant. Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court


DECISION AND REASONS

1. Following an initial hearing at Edinburgh on 3 June 2025, Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Doyle and I, sitting as a panel of the Upper Tribunal, set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal for error of law and directed that the decision be remade in the Upper Tribunal. Subsequent to the issue of a Transfer order, the resumed hearing took place before me sitting alone on 14 January 2026 at Edinburgh.

2. Mr Mullen, Senior Presenting Officer who appeared for the respondent, told me at the outset of the hearing that he had considered the new evidence concerning the provision of accommodation and maintenance for the appellant in the United Kingdom. We had recorded in our error of law decision that: ‘The Judge should not have concluded that the appellant meets the immigration rules without considering evidence of adequacy of maintenance and accommodation.’ [14]. Mr Mullen was satisfied that the new evidence proved to the necessary standard that the appellant would be adequately maintained and accommodated such as to satisfy all the relevant Immigration Rules.

3. In the light of Mr Mullen’s unambiguous submissions, I told the representatives that I would remake the decision allowing the appellant’s appeal against the decision of the Entry Clearance Officer dated 16 February 2024 on human rights grounds, the appellant fully meeting all the requirements of the Immigration Rules under which her application for entry clearance had been refused.

Notice of Decision

I have remade the decision. The appellant’s appeal against the decision of the Entry Clearance Officer Sheffield dated 16 February 2024 is allowed on human rights grounds.


C. N. Lane

Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber


Dated: 14 January 2026