OA012092013

The Appellant born on 6 th December 1980 is a citizen of Pakistan. The Appellant was represented by Mr Thornhill. The Respondent was represented by Mr Harrison a Home Office Presenting Officer. The Sponsor in this case Mrs Asma was present.

Mr Thornhill referred me to the case of F contained within the bundle presented by him to the Upper Tribunal dated 9 th September 2014. I am grateful for the compilation of that bundle given the absence of documents that were before the First-tier Tribunal Judge. It was submitted that it was necessary for the judge, in accordance with the case of F , to have considered, using his own discretion, the facts of this case even if it was found that there were strong compassionate reasons for allowing the appeal.

It was said by Mr Harrison that the judge had looked at the case of F and was aware of that case and I was referred to paragraphs 14 and 15 in particular within the determination that indicated the judge had found no discretionary basis for allowing the appeal.

At the conclusion of the submissions I reserved my decision to consider this case and now provide that decision with my reasons.

Paragraph 320 subparagraph (18) is one of the subparagraphs that comes within the general heading �Grounds on which entry clearance or leave to enter the United Kingdom should normally be refused�. The use of the phrase �should normally be refused� suggests an element of discretion when applying that Rule. The terms of paragraph 320(18) has built in to it the concept of discretion where it states �save where the Immigration Officer is satisfied that admission would be justified for strong compassionate reasons�.