Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[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 >> VA013832014 [2015] UKAITUR VA013832014 (12 January 2015)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2015/VA013832014.html
Cite as: [2015] UKAITUR VA13832014, [2015] UKAITUR VA013832014
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: VA/01383/2014
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
| Heard at Manchester | Determination Promulgated |
| On 6th January 2015 | On 12th January 2015 |
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MARTIN
Between
MR MUHAMMAD ALI MIRZA
Appellant
and
Entry Clearance Officer – ABU DHABI
Respondent
Representation:
For the Appellant: Not Represented
For the Respondent: Mr G Harrison (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. This is an appeal to the Upper Tribunal, with permission, by the Appellant, a Pakistani national who had been reused leave to enter the UK as a family visitor for three weeks to visit his cousin.
2. His appeal came before First-tier Tribunal Judge Davies on 7th August 2014 when the Appellant was not represented and the Sponsor did not attend. The Sponsor did not attend before me either. A letter was received by the Tribunal saying that a Rashid Arshad could not attend and asking for a new date and a transfer to London here he lives. That however is not the Sponsor on the court record who lives in Ashton-under-Lyne and in any event there was no explanation given as to why that person could not attend. I therefore proceeded with the matter.
3. Permission to appeal having been granted it is my task to decide if whether the First-tier Tribunal made an error of law and if so whether and to what extent the determination should be set aside.
4. Judge Davies dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction as the decision attracted only a limited right of appeal – on Human Rights or Race Relations grounds. Judge Davies said that there was no indication that the appeal was on that basis.
5. In that the Judge erred as the grounds of appeal clearly raise both. I thus set aside his determination and proceed to redecide it.
6. Although the grounds of appeal make the claim that the decision is discriminatory and a breach of Human Rights, no evidence or detail is contained in the very lengthy grounds or in the bundle. The detail is all about whether or not the Appellant meets paragraph 41 of the Immigration Rules and that is not within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
7. The appeal is dismissed.
Signed Dated 9th January 2015
Upper Tribunal Judge Martin