Thursday 24th June 2021
Appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber of 13th June 2018 with respect to the Upper Tribunal’s interpretation of Rule 29 of The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008.
The appeal is sought on a point of public importance which it is considered impacts upon all cases before the Upper Tribunal. More specifically, the proper construction of the Tribunal (Procedure) (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 and whether Rule 29 contains a time limit for submission of an acknowledgment of service, with which the Respondent must comply (or seek an extension of time) if they wish to participate in judicial review proceedings.
Following a hearing in May 2018 at the Upper Tribunal, in the matter of KA and another heard by President of the UT (Mr Justice Lane), Vice President, Mr C M G Ockelton and Upper Tribunal Judge Dawson, in a decision promulgated on 13th June 2018, it was decided that the Kumar arrangements should be dispensed approximately six months from the date of the decision (that is, 1st January 2019). However, it was concluded that the Upper Tribunal had the power to make the Kumar arrangements and they did not amount to a purported amendment of the Tribunal Procedure Rules or any practice directions made under the TCE Act 2007.
After this, the appellants filed another set of judicial review proceedings against the SSHD in UTIAC on 7th September 2018. This was due to SSHD not honouring the commitments set out in the consent order agreed between the parties on 31st March 2018 (sealed by UTIAC on 4th April 2018).