VOM v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKUT 410 (IAC)
[2016] UKUT 00410 (IAC)
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
Date 19 July 2016
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Before
The Hon. Mr Justice McCloskey, President,Vice President OckeltonUpper Tribunal Judge Dawson
Between
VOMAppellantTHE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENTRespondentAppellant: Mr R Khubber, of counsel, instructed by Lawrence Lupin SolicitorsRespondent: Ms J Anderson, of counsel, instructed by the Government Legal DepartmentIn a statutory appeal, the right of appeal under s 13 of the 2007 Act does not arise until the Upper Tribunal has completed the process required by s 12.INTERLOCUTORY DECISION1.Direction Regarding Anonymity – Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008We emphasise at the outset that the Appellant has the protection of anonymity. Accordingly, unless and until a tribunal or court directs otherwise, the Appellant is granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify her or any member of her family. This direction applies both to the Appellant and to the Respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.
Introduction
[2]This is a case in which both parties have been granted permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (the “UT”). We shall, for convenience, continue to describe the original appellant, VOM, as “the Appellant” and the Secretary of State for the Home Department, the original respondent, as “the Respondent”.
The Issue
[3]The issue hereby determined is whether a party to appeal proceedings in the Upper Tribunal (the “UT”) has a right to apply for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against a determination of the UT incorporating the twin elements of (a) finding an error of law in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (the “FtT”) and setting such decision aside accordingly. While these are the specific contours of the question which has arisen in the instant case, it may be said that the broader question which arises is whether there is a right to apply for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against any act or determination of the UT which is not finally dispositive of the appeal of which it is seized. The resolution of this issue hinges on two provisions of primary legislation, namely Sections 12 and 13 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (the “2007 Act”).
The Proceedings to Date
[4]The stimulus for the successive appeals to the FtT and the UT in these proceedings was a decision of the Secretary of State, dated 26 September 2013, refusing to revoke a deportation order made in respect of the Appellant, a national of Nigeria aged 38 years. This decision has generated the following series of judicial interventions: