IA000752017

Permission to appeal was granted because it was considered arguable that the Appellant had misunderstood the sequence of the Appellant's applications. The Appellant had arguably lost the right of appeal several years before the decision under appeal, dated 17 January 2017, which itself stated that there was no right of appeal.

Mr Slatter for the Appellant sought valiantly to uphold the judge's decision. He submitted that the judge had been entitled to determine the First-tier Tribunal's jurisdiction for himself, and that the Upper Tribunal should not interfere with his findings. The Home Office had not discharged the burden of proof. The first, in time application for further leave to remain should never have been rejected.

Alarm bells should have been ringing loudly when the text of the Home Office's decision dated 17 January 2017 was considered, warning in familiar terms that there was no right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal. In the tribunal's view, the submissions made to the judge on the Appellant's behalf were completely unsound and misleading, and should not have been made.

In conclusion, the Upper Tribunal finds that the purported appeal lodged against the Respondent's decision dated 17 January 2017 was invalid. There was no right of appeal. The Appellant's 3C leave had long ago expired and in any event there was no longer a right of appeal under the Immigration Rules. The First-tier Tribunal judge's decision is accordingly set aside. The appeal is remade and dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

There was a material error of law in the First-tier Tribunal's decision and reasons, which is set aside.