UI2023002586

              This is an appeal against the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Hussain, promulgated on 4 th January 2023, following a hearing at Taylor House on 7 th December 2022. In the determination, the judge dismissed the appeal of the Appellant, whereupon the Appellant subsequently applied for, and was granted, permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, and thus the matter comes before me.

              The Appellant is a male, a citizen of Bangladesh, and was born on 29 th December 1983. He appealed against the decision of the Respondent dated 3 rd July 2020, refusing his human rights claim in an application for indefinite leave to remain on the basis of ten year's long residence.

              The grounds of application stated that the judge had erred in failing to have regard to the evidence of the Appellant's grandmother and aunt, both of whom had provided witness statements. On 24 th May 2023, the First-tier Tribunal granted permission to appeal on the basis that the "the evidence of those two witnesses (who did not attend to give oral evidence) is capable of having a direct bearing on the matter in dispute and there is no action as to why this evidence was not taken into account" (at paragraph 2).

              In his reply, Mr Balroop submitted that any consideration of Section 117B must not overlook the fact that it is not just the Appellant's "family life" but also that of his grandmother, and this the judge had not done. As for the Surendran guidelines, if the judge needed to seek clarification there is nothing in those guidelines preventing him from asking the questions himself. He asked me to allow the appeal.

          First, the grandmother lives with her own son, and daughter-in-law, and a number of grandchildren (at paragraph 33) the evidence from Mr Mokbul Hussain was that the Appellant used to take the grandmother to her appointments but that, "If he was not able, then he sent his son and daughter when they are free" (paragraph 22).