IA170772015

The Appellant is a citizen of Bangladesh born on [ ] 2006. She appealed against the decision of the Respondent dated 7 th April 2015 refusing to grant her further leave to remain in the United Kingdom under the Immigration Rules and on human rights grounds. The appeal was heard by Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Morris on 13 th October 2015. The appeal was dismissed in a decision promulgated on 29 th October 2015.

The Appellant did not appear for the hearing of this appeal either in person or by representative. My clerk tried to telephone Kalam Solicitors in London, the Appellant's representatives, but no one answered the phone. I discussed this with the Presenting Officer and it was decided to go ahead with submissions from the Presenting Officer and consider the Appellant's claim based on these submissions and the evidence on file. No additional evidence has been supplied by the Appellant since the date of the First-tier hearing.

The Presenting Officer made her submissions relying on the Rule 24 response and submitting that strong reasons are required in a case like this when both of the Appellant's parents are in the United Kingdom illegally. She submitted that the reasons in this claim are sufficiently strong and I was referred to the said case of EV Philippines and also the case of Zoumbas [2013] UKSC 74 .

I was referred to paragraph 30 of the decision in which the judge refers to the Appellant's and her family's private life being mainly with other members of the Bengali community in the United Kingdom. The judge found that the Appellant understands Bengali and is very young. Because of this and because of her family mix within the United Kingdom the change on her return to Bangladesh, will not be drastic.

I was then referred to the said case of Zoumbas at paragraph 24 which clearly states that it is in a child's best interests to be with his/her parents and if the parents are not British citizens the child has no right to future free education and healthcare in the United Kingdom.