VA331212012

This is an appeal against a determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Turnock promulgated on 10 th April 2013 in which he allowed Mrs Begum�s appeal against the refusal of entry clearance for a family visit. The application was made on 11 th July 2012 and the date of decision is the 2 nd August 2012.

Permission to appeal was granted on the basis the Judge had misdirected himself in law in failing to consider whether there was a valid appeal against the immigration decision.

The Judge makes reference to the fact the sponsor, who Mrs Begum intended to visit, is her niece in paragraph 11 of the determination and so the relationship was clearly known. There is however no indication in the determination that the Judge considered the date of application, the changes to the Rules limiting the rights of appeal, or the fact that as the proposed visit was to a prohibited class the only grounds of appeal available to the appellant are those found in section 84 (1) (b) and (c) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

I find Judge Turnock erred in law in proceeding to allow the appeal under the Immigration Rules when he fails to say why he had jurisdiction to do so in a determination drafted solely on the basis of a proposed visit by Mrs Begum to her niece.

I note that the grounds of appeal challenging the decision alleges the decision is unlawful as it is incompatible with Mrs Begum�s rights under the ECHR indicating that human rights grounds were raised although there is nothing in the documentary evidence or before the Judge to show there is in any merit in this ground. Having reviewed the papers there is insufficient evidence to allow Mrs Begum to succeed as it is clearly a proportionate decision in light of the nature of the relationship and limited evidence to the contrary.