Sofian Majera v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Sofian Majera v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

The Upper Tribunal was correct to set aside the First-tier Tribunal's decision for inadequate reasoning, properly remade the decision, and applied the statutory very compelling circumstances test. Rehabilitation and delay did not outweigh the public interest in deportation for a serious offender under section 117C(6) NIAA.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Sofian Majera; Respondent/defendant: The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Deportation, Article 8 ECHR, Very Compelling Circumstances Test, Statutory Interpretation, Tribunal Procedure, Rehabilitation, Deterrence, Proportionality Assessment
Immigration Human Rights Administrative Law Deportation Article 8 ECHR Very Compelling Circumstances Test Statutory Interpretation Tribunal Procedure +3 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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sofian Majera

Appellant/claimant

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Upper Tribunal erred in law by setting aside the First-tier Tribunal's decision allowing the appeal against deportation
  2. 2 Proper approach to the 'very compelling circumstances' test under section 117C(6) NIAA where rehabilitation is claimed
  3. 3 Whether the Upper Tribunal was wrong to remake the decision de novo rather than remit to the First-tier Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The Upper Tribunal was correct to set aside the First-tier Tribunal's decision for inadequate reasoning, properly remade the decision, and applied the statutory very compelling circumstances test. Rehabilitation and delay did not outweigh the public interest in deportation for a serious offender under section 117C(6) NIAA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order on SSHD's application regarding settlement correspondence
  • Deportation order stands; revocation refused