IA102212015

This is an appeal by the Appellant against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Nixon promulgated on 3 July 2015 in which he dismissed the Appellant's appeal against the Respondent's decision to cancel her continuing leave.

"The grounds do sufficient to raise the issue of the burden and standard of proof where the respondent relies on dishonesty on the part of the appellant. Insofar as the judge stated that the burden lay on the appellant she arguably erred in law: see JC (Part 9 HC395 - burden of proof) China [2007] UKAIT 00027 ."

At the hearing I heard submissions from both representatives, following which I reserved my decision which I set out below with reasons.

In response Mr. Ohanugo questioned whether the judge had understood where the burden of proof lay. He submitted that it seemed from the decision that the judge believed that the burden of proof lay on the Appellant and that this was a fundamental and material error.

He referred to paragraph [11]. There was no reference here to the Respondent having disclosed any material information which could show that the Appellant had been attempting to mislead. He submitted that the standard of proof was very high. The judge had relied on the Appellant to discharge the burden. In placing no weight on the evidence of the agent, it showed that the burden had been placed on the Appellant, not on the Respondent.