IA075222014 & Ors.

These are the linked appeals of the appellants against the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Thorne promulgated 23.6.14 dismissing their appeals against the decisions of the Secretary of State, dated 23.1.14, to refuse their applications for leave to remain in the UK. The Judge heard the appeal on 9.6.14.

The lengthy grounds of appeal raise a number of complaints about the determination of the First-tier Tribunal, including that the judge made no reference to the established case law and applied the wrong legal tests, if any were applied, and failed to properly consider the best interests of the children affected by the Secretary of State�s decision.

In granting permission to appeal, Judge Page stated, �It is apparent from the judge�s determination, which contains a paucity of reasoning and does not make easy reading, that the judge has given little, if any, weight to the position of these children.� It is stated that it is not clear how the judge came to his conclusions and did not explain why the evidence was considered to be �inadequate.�

The first difficulty is that the judge may have misapprehended what decisions were under appeal. The refusal decision of 23.1.14 was issued in respect of both parents and both children. The child appellant was 6 years of age at the date of the hearing, but another child, Charlene, was already 7 years of age, though her appeal had been ruled invalid. However, at �30 the judge appears to think that the decision in relation to the first appellant was made on 13.9.13. The �new� decision of 23.1.14 was made after the issue of Judicial Review proceedings.

There is no merit in the argument that the judge was wrong to regard Charlene�s appeal as invalid. There is no right of appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decision made under Rule 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005.