IA021842014

The appellant sought and was granted permission to appeal to the Upper tribunal on the basis that the judge had �not considered the application of Gulshan or whether the gateway can be passed through to consider whether there has been a breach of Article 8�..�

Permission to appeal was granted on 11 June 2014 by Judge P J M Hollingworth, a Judge of the First-Tier Tribunal.

On 18 June 2014 the respondent put in her response to the appellant� grounds of appeal under rule 24, opposing the appeal and submitting that the Judge had directed himself appropriately and his non consideration of the appellant�s claim was not in material error of law as it had not been raised and in the alternative it would have made no difference to the outcome of the case as there is nothing exceptional or compelling about the appellant�s circumstances that would warrant this case being granted outside of the rules.

Having given careful consideration to all the relevant facts and the law, I find that the decision of Judge Tootell was not in material error of law for the reasons argued by Ms Pal. The principles set down in Gulshan are of no avail to the appellant. This appeal must therefore be dismissed.

However given the positive credibility findings made by Judge Tootell regarding the appellant�s claim that he fell foul of the rules because of wrong advice by college and a professional, I respectfully suggest that the respondent should consider grant of leave on an exceptional basis to enable him to complete his studies.