Case No. UKUT-00197-(IAC)

32. The error in the F irst-tier Tribunal J udge ’ s determination was his failure to apply the effect of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 and the process of re-adoption in the United Kingdom which is permissible pursuant to the A doptions with a Foreign Element Regulations 2005 and paragraph 309B of the I mmigration R ules. It is not altogether surprising that the judge fell into this error and the purpose of this determination is to set out the relevant provisions in order to provide the se provisions with a greater currency. In particular, the F irst-tier Tribunal judge confused the very distinctive roles played by paragraphs 310 and 316A of the Immigration Rules. The sponsor had been vetted and approved as the applicant ’ s adopt er by the accredited adoption agency, the British Association of Adoption and Fostering ( BAAF) , and the Department for E ducation . 33. The error was compounded by the unfortunate submission made by counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the appellant did not meet the requirements of paragraph 316A. Whilst this renders the determination of the First-tier Tribunal J udge readily understandable, it does not render it lawful , since Counsel’s concession cannot obviate the judge’s duty to apply the law correctly, wittingly or unwittingly. The concession does not, of course, bind either Ms Cronin or the Upper Tribunal.