OA196952012

For the Appellant: Mr R Solomon of Counsel instructed by Starck Uberoi LLP Solicitors

The Appellant, Miss Rungnapa Amsri, who was born on 17 June 1998 and is a citizen of Thailand, applied for entry clearance to join her mother, Mrs Nangnoi Bualom, as her child under paragraph 297 of the Immigration Rules. Her appeal against the ensuing refusal was heard by Immigration Judge Turquet sitting at Hatton Cross on 12 July 2013. Both parties were represented, the Appellant by Mr Solomon. In a determination of 19 July, promulgated on 26 July, 2013, the appeal was dismissed under the Immigration Rules.

The Appellant�s application for permission to appeal, settled in great detail by Mr Solomon, was refused on 6 September 2013 by Judge Astle on the basis that it represented only disagreement with the judicial findings, but granted on 22 November 2013 by Upper Tribunal Judge Freeman on the basis that arguably not all relevant evidence was taken into account. This exactly encapsulates the issue in this challenging appeal.

At the error of law hearing before us on 7 January 2014, the Sponsor was present and the proceedings were interpreted to her. The hearing, which lasted almost an hour, took the form of submissions, Mr Solomon developing the permission application and Mr Bramble responding. We are indebted to both of them for cogent, cerebral and not overstated submissions, which have greatly assisted us.

The first core issue is whether Judge Turquet did not take account or sufficient account of relevant evidence. A judge need not discuss every detailed aspect of the evidence, especially in an appeal such as this in which the evidence is copious. But he or she must take account of evidence which is significant and relevant to an issue which arises for decision.