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

 

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: ea/10487/2016

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

Heard at Field House	Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 27 th March 2018	On 11 th April 2018

 

Before

 

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CHALKLEY

 

Between

 

miss temitayo adeola marble

(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)

Appellant

 

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

 

For the Appellant: Ms S. Ferguson of Counsel instructed by Okafor & Co Solicitors

For the Respondent: Ms Z. Ahmad a Home Office Presenting Officer

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

 

1. The appellant is a citizen of Nigeria who was born on 31 ^st January 1980, and who arrived in the United Kingdom on the basis of her marriage in August 2011. She was issued with a residence card on 26 ^th October 2011, with an expiry date of 26 ^th October 2016. The residence card was revoked because she was no longer living with her family member. The appellant claimed that she married a French national on 6 ^th November 2010, and that sadly they divorced on 12 ^th October 2015. She maintained that at the time of their marriage and since the divorce, both she and her French national former husband have been working and, therefore, that her former spouse has been exercising treaty rights in the United Kingdom.

 

2. The respondent having revoked the appellant's residence card, the appellant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal. Her appeal was heard at Newport on 13 ^th July 2017, by First-tier Tribunal Judge Suffield-Thompson. She dismissed the appeal.

 

3. The appellant challenged the judge's determination. Throughout her determination the judge appears to assume that the appellant is required to demonstrate that both she and her former spouse are continuing to exercise treaty rights in the United Kingdom, whereas in fact, of course, it was only necessary for the appellant to demonstrate that her Sponsor husband had been exercising treaty rights at the time of their marriage and at the time of the divorce.

 

4. There was evidence in the appellant's bundle from HM Customs and Revenue, which effectively demonstrated that the appellant met the requirements of the Immigration Rules, because clearly at all material times her former spouse was exercising treaty rights as an EEA national.

 

5. At the hearing before me Ms Ahmad confirmed that she was satisfied that the appellant's former spouse was exercising treaty rights at all relevant times. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Suffield-Thompson does contain a material error of law. I set aside her decision and remake the decision myself.

 

6. I therefore allow the appellant's appeal.

 

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley Date: 11 April 2018

 

 

 

TO THE RESPONDENT

FEE AWARD

 

As I have allowed the appeal. I have considered making a fee award and have decided to make a fee award of any fee which has been paid or may be payable for the following reason. The appellant's appeal was successful.

 

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley Date: 11 April 2018