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

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: EA/03543/2015

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

Heard at Birmingham	Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 9 June 2017	On 16 June 2017

 

 

Before

 

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HEMINGWAY

 

 

Between

 

MS NNEKA MAUREEN OKECHI

(Anonymity order not made)

Appellant

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

 

Respondent

Representation:

 

For the Appellant: No appearance

For the Respondent: Ms H Aboni (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

 

1. This is the appellant's appeal to the Upper Tribunal from a decision of the First‑tier Tribunal promulgated on 17 October 2016, dismissing her appeal against the respondent's decision of 30 November 2015 to refuse her a Derivative Residence Card on the basis that she is the primary carer of a British national child.

 

2. The First‑tier Tribunal had dismissed the appeal but permission to appeal had been granted because it was thought the First‑tier Tribunal might have misconstrued certain information given by the appellant when she had made her application for the Residence Card.

 

3. It is clear that the appellant has previously been assisted by an organisation called Lifeline Options Community Interest Company. However, despite that she did not attend the hearing before me in order to further pursue her appeal to the Upper Tribunal. Mrs Aboni was helpfully able to explain that, in fact, she had been granted leave to remain in the UK on an entirely different basis. That may well explain her decision not to attend.

 

4. In any event, it did not seem to me that the First‑tier Tribunal had misconstrued the information at all in the manner which had been suggested in the grounds of appeal to the Upper Tribunal. In the circumstances, and given the appellant's failure to further pursue her appeal, it is dismissed. However, that will not affect the validity of the leave which she has, according to Ms Aboni, already been granted on a different basis.

 

5. For the purposes of this appeal, though, I conclude that the First‑tier Tribunal did not err in law and that its decision shall stand.

 

6. I have made no anonymity order because none was made by the First‑tier Tribunal, none has been sought before the Upper Tribunal and there does not appear to be any reason to make such an order.

 

Decision

 

The First‑tier Tribunal did not err in law and its decision shall stand.

 

Anonymity

 

No anonymity order is made.

 

 

Signed: Date: 15 June 2017

Upper Tribunal Judge Hemingway

 

TO THE RESPONDENT

FEE AWARD

 

I make no fee award.

 

 

Signed: Date: 15 June 2017

Upper Tribunal Judge Hemmingway