OA137572014

I shall refer in this decision to the appellant as the respondent and to the respondent as the appellant, as they appeared respectively before the First-tier Tribunal.

The appellant, HA was born in 2011 and is aged 4 years. The sponsor is the appellant's father and lives in Sheffield. The sponsor's wife (the appellant's mother) who has successfully obtained entry clearance to the United Kingdom has returned to Pakistan to look after the appellant. Before the First-tier Tribunal (Judge M Davies) the sponsor father accepted that the appellant could not meet the financial requirements of the Immigration Rules [14]. Judge Davies allowed the appeal on Article 8 grounds. The respondent now appeals, with permission, to the Upper Tribunal.

Judge Davies recorded at [13] the reasons why the sponsor had not applied for the appellant to enter the United Kingdom at the same time as his wife. It appears that the sponsor erroneously believed that the appellant was entitled to British nationality. The judge noted that it appeared that the Appellant could now (as at the date of the First-tier Tribunal hearing) meet the financial requirements of the Immigration Rules. He rejected the Presenting Officer's submission that a new application should be made.

I find that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal should be set aside. I have reached that conclusion for the following reasons. There is an inadequacy of reasoning on the part of the First-tier Tribunal. At [15], the judge wrote:

"However I find that the circumstances of this appeal are both compelling and exceptional which justifies me in considering whether the appeal should be allowed on Article 8 grounds. I found that they are exceptional as set out in the sponsor's witness statement."