UI2022006176

             This is an appeal against the decision of the Secretary of State dated 7 December 2020 to refuse a human rights claim made by the appellant on 15 June 2020. The appellant's appeal against the Secretary of State's decision was originally heard and dismissed by First-tier Tribunal Judge Monson in a decision promulgated on 8 August 2022, pursuant to section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 ("the 2002 Act").

             The appellant is a citizen of Bangladesh and was born in 1983. The central tenet of his case is that he has accrued ten years' continuous lawful residence, including pursuant to section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 ("the 1971 Act"), thereby meeting the requirement for indefinite leave to remain under para. 276B of the Immigration Rules. As explained below, in order to determine whether he meets para. 276B, it will be necessary to consider:

             It will also be necessary to consider the appellant's prospective reception in Bangladesh (para. 276ADE(1)(vi) of the Immigration Rules), and whether there are exceptional circumstances such that it would be unjustifiably harsh for the appellant to be removed from the United Kingdom.

             The Secretary of State takes a different view. According to her records, on 27 March 2012 the appellant was informed by letter that his leave was being curtailed with effect from 26 May 2012, on account of his educational institution, the London City Business School, losing its sponsor licence. He has thus been without leave to remain since then. There can be no question of him having accrued ten years' continuous lawful residence.

             The Secretary of State says that her decision of 8 May 2013 mistakenly proceeded on the footing that the appellant's application was in time. While that was a mistake, it cannot have had the effect of retrospectively restoring the appellant's curtailed leave.