IA005022016

On 1 October 2014, the appellant, a citizen of Pakistan, made an application for further leave to remain, as a Tier 4 Student. That application was refused in a decision dated 8 January 2016, with a concomitant decision to remove her pursuant to section 47 of the Immigration and Asylum Nationality Act 2006.

The appellant appealed against that decision and her appeal came before a Judge of the First-tier Tribunal ("the FtJ") at a hearing on 22 February 2017. The FtJ dismissed the appeal.

The appellant's grounds of appeal in relation to the FtJ's decision relate firstly to what is said to have been an erroneous assessment on his part in terms of whether the appellant had varied the application made to the respondent, the purported variation being in terms of Article 8 of the ECHR. Secondly, complaint is made about the FtJ's consideration of documentary evidence provided after the hearing by the respondent's representative. It is argued that the FtJ should not have taken that evidence into account or if he did, should have given the appellant the opportunity to respond to it.

It is necessary to set out in a little more detail the events that took place before the FtJ, and the FtJ's reasons for dismissing the appeal.

Having heard the appellant's evidence, and referring to what he said was inconsistency in certain respects with her witness statement, the FtJ said that although no curtailment letter had been produced by the respondent, the appellant accepts receiving such a document towards the end of October 2015.