IA180182014

The appellant appeals against the decision and reasons statement of First-tier Tribunal Judge J S Pacey promulgated on 2 October 2014 on the grounds that the judge failed to take proper consideration of the transitional provisions relating to the English language test criteria listed in appendix O to the immigration rules.

Mr Mills conceded that the judge erred in law by failing to accept the appellant's English language certificate from Trinity College as meeting the relevant requirements. Mr Mills advised me that as a result the judge's decision should be set aside and remade to allow the appeal under paragraph 284 of the immigration rules because the only issue to be decided was whether the appellant met the English language requirements.

Of course I accept the concession and allow the appeal to the Upper Tribunal and remake the decision to allow the appeal against the immigration decisions of 15 April 2014 to refuse to grant further leave to remain and to remove the appellant. However, it is appropriate to set out in more detail my reasons for proceeding with the appeal in the absence of the appellant and to give reasons for the decision.

With regard to the substantive issues, I noted that the Tribunal's file lacked the appellant's bundle. Mr Mills provided his copy which contained the English language certificate issued in July 2015 by Trinity College and the reasons for refusal letter. At the date of application the appellant indicated that she required further leave to remain in order to obtain the KoLL qualification. Her application was refused because she had not provided an English language qualification but by the date of hearing she provided the Trinity College certificate.

There is a question about what law the judge should have considered. As per Odelola the applicable immigration rules would be those in force at the date of decision subject to any transitional provisions. At the date of decision certificates issued by Trinity College were approved in appendix O.