Syed v Secretary of State for the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LADY JUSTICE HALLETT |
| Judgment Date | 15 June 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] EWCA Civ 685 |
| Docket Number | C5/2014/3189 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 15 June 2016 |
[2016] EWCA Civ 685
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
(IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2A 2LL
Lady Justice Hallett
C5/2014/3189
The Applicant was not present and was not represented
The Respondent was not present and was not represented
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: This case was listed as one of a number of applications or renewed applications for permission to appeal at 10 o'clock this morning. It is now 10.15 am and nobody has appeared to represent Syed Syed. There is no need for anonymity, so in future he can be referred to by his full name.
On 16 May 2016 he was sent a letter by the list office notifying him of today's date. A number of attempts have been made by the associate this morning to notify or contact him. There has been no response to those attempts. The mobile telephone either has a message that the person is uncontactable or rings and there is no response. I am, therefore, satisfied on the information before me that he has been given proper notice, and I shall proceed to give judgment.
The Applicant is an Indian national. He came to the United Kingdom with leave to study. He was granted leave to remain as a post-study migrant. He made an application in June 2013 to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) migrant under the points-based system. This was refused. His appeal was dismissed.
There were three proposed grounds of appeal to this court. First, that one of the Immigration Rules upon which the Secretary of State relied in refusing the applicant's application required certain documentation that it was impossible to provide. It was argued that financial institutions could not produce letters stating that third party's funds were held for the purposes of an applicant establishing a business. This issue was considered and rejected in Iqbal and Others [2015] EWCA Civ 169 and therefore is unarguable.
The second ground similarly has already been considered and decided. This is in relation to the flexibility of the Secretary of State's evidential policy. The grounds of appeal...
To continue reading
Request your trial