OA185412012

This is an appeal to the Upper Tribunal by the Appellant against a determination of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge M A Khan) promulgated on 10 th July 2013 in which he dismissed the Appellant�s appeal against the Entry Clearance Officer�s refusal to grant her leave to enter as the child of her UK Sponsor.

The Entry Clearance Officer had refused the application on the basis that the Appellant did not meet the requirements of paragraph 301(i)(b), 301(i)(c), 301(iii), 301(iv) and 301(iva) of the Immigration Rules. The major issues were that the Entry Clearance Officer was not satisfied that the Appellant and Sponsor were related as claimed, that the Sponsor had had sole responsibility for the Appellant or that the Appellant could be maintained and accommodated in the UK.

The Judge accepted, on the basis of DNA evidence before him, that the Appellant and Sponsor were related as claimed. However, he was not satisfied that the Sponsor had had sole responsibility for the Appellant nor was he satisfied as to accommodation and maintenance due to a lack of evidence before him.

The grounds upon which permission to appeal was granted assert that the Judge erred in refusing to adjourn the hearing on the Appellant�s representative�s application to firstly await crucial documents in the form of a court order from Jamaica which it was claimed was evidence of sole responsibility and secondly for the attendance of the Sponsor. Rather puzzlingly the grounds also assert the Judge erred with regard to his consideration of the DNA evidence, puzzling because the Judge accepted that the DNA evidence showed the Appellant and Sponsor were related as claimed.

The Judge who granted permission found it arguable that the First-tier Tribunal had erred because when dealing with the adjournment request because he had referred himself to Rule 19 but not Rule 21 of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005.