BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments >> EA097652016 [2018] UKAITUR EA097652016 (16 March 2018)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2018/EA097652016.html
Cite as: [2018] UKAITUR EA97652016, [2018] UKAITUR EA097652016

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: EA/09765/2016

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at Field House

Decision & Reasons Promulgated

On 23 February 2018

On 16 March 2018

 

 

 

Before

 

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE APPLEYARD

 

 

Between

 

Mr Ifta Khairul Islam

(anonymity direction NOT MADE )

Appellant

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

For the Appellant: Mr M Salim, Legal Representative.

For the Respondent: Mr L Tarlow, Home Office Presenting Officer.

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

1.              The Appellant is a citizen of Bangladesh who made application for a Residence Card as confirmation of a right to reside in the United Kingdom as the extended family member of a person exercising "Treaty rights" in the United Kingdom pursuant to Regulation 8 and 17(4) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006. That application was refused and he appealed and in a decision promulgated on 27 July 2017 Resident Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Zucker dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

2.              The Appellant sought permission to appeal which was granted.

3.              Thus the appeal came before me today.

4.              On 9 November 2017 in Khan v SSHD and Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1755 the Court of Appeal held that Sala was wrongly decided and that a decision to refuse admission or a Residence Card to an extended family member is an "EEA decision" within the meaning of the above mentioned 2016 Regulations and therefore attracts a right of appeal.

5.              On this basis both representatives agreed that Resident Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Zucker had materially erred and that the appeal should be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard afresh.

6.              That is an analysis that I share.

 

Decision

 

The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making 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, Court and Enforcement Act 2007 and Practice Direction 7(b) before any Judge aside from Resident Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Zucker.

 

No anonymity direction is made.

 

 

 

Signed Date 16 March 2018.

 

 

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Appleyard

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2018/EA097652016.html