BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[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 >> IA064152021 [2023] UKAITUR IA064152021 (29 March 2023) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2023/IA064152021.html Cite as: [2023] UKAITUR IA64152021, [2023] UKAITUR IA064152021 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
|
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER Extempore decision |
Case No: UI- 2022-004012 First-tier Tribunal No: HU/51931/2021 IA/06415/2021 |
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Decision & Reasons Issued:
On the 29 March 2023
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE SHERIDAN
Between
NT
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Ms P Solanki, Counsel instructed by Duncan Lewis Solicitors
For the Respondent: Ms A Everett, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
Heard at Field House on 30 January 2023
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. This is an appeal against a decision of Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Cary promulgated on 6 July 2022.
2. I will only give very brief reasons because at the hearing Ms Everett conceded the appeal on behalf of the respondent. Ms Everett accepted the appellant's argument, as set out in ground 1, that the judge fell into error by proceeding on the basis that the appellant had not applied to be treated as a vulnerable witness when in fact she had done so. Ms Everett characterised this as procedural unfairness and expressed the view that the case should be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard afresh.
3. In the light of Ms Everett's concession, it was not necessary to hear from Ms Solanki.
Notice of Decision
4. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside.
5. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be made afresh before any judge other than Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Cary or Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Bartlett.
6. No findings are preserved.
D. Sheridan
Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber
6.3.2023
