UI2023002593

             The appellant appeals, with permission of First-tier Tribunal Judge Khurram, against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Moffatt (the Judge) that was promulgated on 25 March 2023.

             As I indicated at the end of hearing, I find the Judge erred in law and set aside her decision. I remake the decision to allow the original appeal. My reasons follow.

             Mr Melvin submitted that the decision was sustainable as the findings were ones the Judge was entitled to make from the evidence. He acknowledged that case law sets out that usually a finding of family life under Article 8(1) in similar cases would be sufficient to outweigh the public interest in maintaining the economic wellbeing of the country but reminded me that it was not automatic. As the Judge had given reasons why she departed from the usual position, there could be no legal error.

             There is no dispute about the Judge's finding that family life exists between the appellant and sponsor. The challenge relates solely to whether the Judge properly carried out the necessary balancing act when assessing proportionality.

             The case law is settled about the weight that should be given to the historic injustice and it should be given significant weight. I am grateful to Mr Wilford for his clear submissions on these matters, which has made my task much easier.