Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
              It was convenient to hear the appeal at approximately noon. The respondent to this appeal, hereinafter "the claimant" has not attended and had offered no explanation. The papers showed that notice of hearing had been sent by post and we are satisfied that he had proper notice of the hearing.
              Mrs Nolan, who appears for the Secretary of State, that is the appellant in this appeal, explained that the claimant has been given leave to be in the United Kingdom by a different route and it is therefore not at all surprising that he did not attend today. She was careful to explain that the leave given to him is not a kind which of itself causes this appeal to be abandoned.
              Directions were sent to the claimant giving him an opportunity to respond because it was thought this was a case that had been determined by Celik and he did not respond to those directions.
              It is quite clear to us that this is an appeal that should not have been allowed. The judge misunderstood the law and, although, as we say, there is every reason to be sympathetic, the only proper decision is to set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal and substitute a decision dismissing the appeal against the Secretary of State's decision which is what we do. That is the decision of both of us.
              The First-tier Tribunal erred in law. We set aside its decision and substitute a decision dismissing the claimant's appeal.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.