Saleh Ahmed Handule Ali v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor

Saleh Ahmed Handule Ali v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor

Article 8 ECHR is engaged for a settled migrant seeking re-entry to the UK to resume private life, and the refusal of entry clearance must be assessed for proportionality. Abbas does not preclude such engagement; the FTT erred in law by misinterpreting Abbas and failing to consider proportionality.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Saleh Ahmed Handule Ali; Defendant/respondent: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber); Interested Party/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; permission to proceed with judicial review granted; order of UT refusing permission to appeal quashed; permission to appeal to Upper Tribunal granted; case remitted to Upper Tribunal for determination of Article 8 private life appeal on merits.
Legal Topics
Article 8 ECHR, Private Life, Entry Clearance, Cart Jurisdiction, Indefinite Leave to Remain, Returning Resident, Proportionality, Error of Law
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Article 8 ECHR Private Life Entry Clearance Cart Jurisdiction Indefinite Leave to Remain Returning Resident +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saleh Ahmed Handule Ali

Claimant/appellant

Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)

Defendant/respondent

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Interested Party/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is Article 8 ECHR (private life) engaged when a resident non-national with indefinite leave to remain, whose travel document is lost or stolen abroad, seeks re-entry to the UK?
  2. 2 Did the First Tier Tribunal err in law by misinterpreting Abbas and summarily dismissing the Article 8 private life claim?
  3. 3 Should permission to appeal have been granted by the Upper Tribunal?

Ratio Decidendi

Article 8 ECHR is engaged for a settled migrant seeking re-entry to the UK to resume private life, and the refusal of entry clearance must be assessed for proportionality. Abbas does not preclude such engagement; the FTT erred in law by misinterpreting Abbas and failing to consider proportionality.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; permission to proceed with judicial review granted; order of UT refusing permission to appeal quashed; permission to appeal to Upper Tribunal granted; case remitted to Upper Tribunal for determination of Article 8 private life appeal on merits.

Orders

  • Permission to proceed with claim for judicial review granted.
  • Order of Upper Tribunal refusing permission to appeal quashed.