IA016402013

This is a challenge by the Secretary of State to the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Traynor who allowed the appeal of the appellant by way of a determination promulgated on 31 May 2013. for the sake of convenience, I continue, however, to refer to the Secretary of State as the respondent and to Mr Wadood as the appellant. There has been no anonymity order in this case and none was requested of the Upper Tribunal.

No challenge is made to the decision as far as section 47 is concerned. What is challenged is the decision under the rules given the changed position of the law following the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Raju and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 754 . Permission to appeal was initially refused by the First-tier Tribunal but granted by Upper Tribunal Judge McKee on renewal.

The matter thus came before me on 11 October 2013. I heard opening submissions from Mr Avery who relied upon Raju . He submitted that this was a straightforward case; the appellant did not have his degree when he made his application and so could not qualify under the rules. The judge had erred in law.

In reply Mr Avery submitted that there had been a technical error with the transmission of the application for permission to appeal and that once alerted to that, the missing part of the application was submitted forthwith. This matter had been dealt with by Judge McKee.

I have considered all the evidence and submissions carefully. I deal first with the issue of jurisdiction. It is Mr Khan�s submission that the Secretary of State�s application was made out of time, that no request for an extension was made and that as such the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal.