UI2022002564

              This is an appeal against the determination of First-tier Tribunal Judge Andrews, promulgated on 14 th April 2022, following a hearing on 31 st March 2022, remotely via Cloud Video Platform. In the determination, the judge dismissed the appeal of the Appellant, whereupon the Appellant subsequently applied for, and was granted, permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, and thus the matter comes before me.

              The Appellant is a male, a citizen of Pakistan, and is 73 years of age, having been born on 16 th December 1949. He appealed against the decision of the Respondent dated 19 th February 2020, refusing his application on human rights grounds for leave to remain in the UK, on the basis of his family and private life, claiming to have lived in the United Kingdom continuously for at least 20 years.

              The judge went on to consider submissions on behalf of the Appellant, given by Mr Gajjar of Counsel, who had wisely accepted that Judge Flynn's 2016 decision would be the starting point. Mr Gajjar, however, asserted that, "Mr Chaudhary says that he sees the Appellant most weekends, and his evidence is not undermined by his being unaware of the Appellant's 2016 appeal" (paragraph 25).

              In her findings of fact, the judge at the outset observed how, "I have also had the opportunity to see and hear the appellant and his witness give evidence" (paragraph 26). The Appellant had lived all his life in Pakistan and he spoke Urdu and he had a number of good friends in the UK (paragraph 27). The medical evidence had not been challenged by the Respondent (paragraphs 28 to 29 and paragraph 30(ii)).

          I am satisfied that the making of the decision by the judge involved the making of an error on a point of law (see Section 12(1) of TCEA 2007) such that I should set aside the decision. My reasons are as follows.