IA017862014

The Appellant is a citizen of Pakistan who is married to a citizen of Norway. Until very recently he had leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) Migrant. He had applied to the Secretary of State for the grant of a residence card as confirmation of his right to residence under the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006. The application was completed on the basis that his wife, as the EEA family member, was a job seeker (as indicated at section 9.2 of the application form). The application was made on 8 th July 2013.

The Appellant applied for permission to appeal. He noted that the judge had found that his wife had been a qualified person as at the date of application. He contended that the appeal should have been allowed on that basis. He also went on to argue that he would also have qualified as his wife should be classed as a self-sufficient person.

Permission was initially refused on the basis that the relevant date was the date of hearing. The application was renewed to this Tribunal. On 2 nd June 2014 Upper Tribunal Judge Macleman granted permission, stating as follows:

The Secretary of State put in a response under Upper Tribunal Procedure Rule 24 contending that Judge Iqbal directed herself appropriately.

I agree with the view expressed in the grant of permission by Upper Tribunal Judge Macleman that it was procedurally unfair of the judge of the first instance to take the point against the Appellant that there was no up-to-date evidence of his wife being a jobseeker when this was a matter being decided on papers and the Appellant had not been on notice that the point would be taken. It was open to the judge to issue a direction to the Appellant that the point was in issue or to adjourn the matter for an oral hearing giving him notice of the point.