Conclusion
33. The appeal which the Appellant seeks to pursue at this intermediate of these proceedings would be an expensive and delaying distraction, a diversion having no discernible utility, fulfilling no identifiable imperative, countering no mischief and, fundamentally, vindicating no legal right. 34. We conclude that an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal only against a decision of the UT which is finally dispositive of an appeal from the FtT. We thus decide on the ground that this is the correct construction of Sections 12 and 13 of the 2007 Act. Our alternative conclusion is that no appeal lies to the Court of Appeal against any decision of the UT other than one which is finally dispositive of an appeal from the FtT as this is an excluded decision within the compass of Article 3(m) of the 2009 Order.
THE HON. MR JUSTICE MCCLOSKEY PRESIDENT OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER
- Direction Regarding Anonymity – Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008
- Introduction
- The Issue
- The Proceedings to Date
- Statutory Framework
- “Right of appeal to the Tribunal
- “Pending appeal
- Section 11
- “Right to appeal to Upper Tribunal
- “Proceedings on appeal to Upper Tribunal
- “Right to appeal to Court of Appeal etc.
- “Overriding objective and parties’ obligation to co-operate with the Upper Tribunal
- “Case management powers
- The Parties’ Contentions In Outline
- Discussion
- A right of appeal is conferred by statute or equivalent legislative authority; it is not a mere matter of practice or procedure and neither the superior nor the inferior Court or Tribunal nor both combined can create or take away such a right.
- Evans v Bartlam
- Re D (A Child)
- R v Z
- R (Quintavalle) v the Secretary of State for Health
- Brown v Dean
- R v Pinfold
- Hewitson v Hewitson
- R v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex Parte Kebeline
- McLuckie v Coroner for Northern Ireland
- further
- partial
- Conclusion