UI2023000870

              The appellant is a Chinese national who was born on 20 June 1973. On 20 June 2023, Upper Tribunal Judge Kamara found that the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Gandhi) had erred in law in dismissing the appellant's appeal on Article 8 ECHR grounds. She set aside Judge Gandhi's decision and she ordered that the decision on the appeal would be remade after a further hearing in the Upper Tribunal.

              Judge Kamara ordered that the Secretary of State should review the appellant's case and should explain why he had been granted permission to work. In the event, there was no explanation before us of the basis on which that decision was taken, although Mr Clarke provided some contemporaneous screenshots.

              The appellant entered the UK lawfully on 15 December 2008. He was granted periods of further leave and eventually Indefinite Leave to Remain. When he applied for Indefinite Leave to Remain in 2013, he submitted a TOEIC English test result from Queensway College. It was subsequently alleged that the appellant had obtained that test result by using a proxy. The cancellation of his ILR on that basis was the subject of an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal.

              The appellant made further representations to the Secretary of State on 8 September 2021, relying on his relationship with his wife and children in the UK and submitting that his removal would be in breach of Article 8 ECHR. As we have said, that application was refused and his appeal against the refusal was dismissed but the matter comes before us to remake the decision on the appeal.

              It was confirmed at the outset of the hearing before us that there was to be no oral evidence. The appeal therefore proceeded on the basis of submissions only.