OA005232013

This is an appeal by the Entry Clearance Officer (ECO). However, for the purposes of this decision, I shall refer to the ECO as the respondent and Mrs Aftab as the appellant, reflecting their positions as they were in the appeal before the First-tier Tribunal.

The appellant lodged an appeal against that decision, stating that she was enclosing a TOEIC test certificate and that she had not provided one earlier because she was wrongly informed at the Embassy that a qualification taught in English would suffice. Following a review by an entry clearance manager (ECM), the decision was maintained, with the ECM noting that no new documentary evidence had been produced with the appeal.

Permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal was sought by the respondent on the basis that the judge had misdirected herself by relying on evidence arising after the date of the decision. Permission was granted on 8 April 2014.

Mr Smart relied upon an old judgment of the Administrative Court in ex parte Maya Banu [1999] A R 161 in submitting that the ECM review was not part of the original decision-making process and that the date of decision remained the date of the original refusal. The judge had erred by allowing the appeal when the appellant was unable to meet the requirements of the immigration rules at the date of the decision.

Mr Mahmood submitted that the judge was entitled to take the English language test certificate into account. He also produced in evidence a letter dated 12 May 2014 from UK NARIC confirming that the appellant�s MSc in Sociology from the International Islamic University, Islamabad was comparable to a British Bachelor degree and submitted that the ECO ought to have granted entry clearance on the basis that her qualification was recognised by NARIC UK at the time the decision was made.