[2023] UKUT 00277 (IAC)

We have considerable sympathy with Mr Allaraj. There is nothing before us to suggest that he has acted in anything other than good faith. He understandably thought that the Immigration Officer had the power to admit him to the United Kingdom and he is said to be distressed by the submissions now made by the Secretary of State to the contrary. It is a wholly unsatisfactory situation, as Mr Deller acknowledged before us.

There are other cases in which this wholly unsatisfactory state of affairs has occurred, and Immigration Officers have placed similar stamps in the passports of extended family members who could not be admitted to the UK under the Regulations. At least three such cases have been before the Upper Tribunal to our knowledge. One of those cases - GH (Albania) v SSHD – was drawn to the Upper Tribunal’s attention by the Government Legal Department in advance of this hearing. GH (Albania) was decided by a panel of the Upper Tribunal under reference UI-2022-003053. The appellant was subsequently granted permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal under reference CA-2023-000371. The Secretary of State submitted that this appeal should be adjourned to await the Court of Appeal’s decision. That application was refused in advance of the hearing, in light of the need for the Upper Tribunal to express a concluded view on the issues, given the number of cases in which these issues are arising. We should record that Mr Deller, who only assumed conduct of the case at the eleventh hour following the refusal of that adjournment request, did not renew the application. Given that permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal was only granted at the end of June, we would have refused any such application had it been made.

Nothing we have said in this decision is intended to suggest that Mr Allaraj or any other litigant in a similar situation might not have alternative means of recourse against the Secretary of State or the Immigration Officer for the unlawful stamping of the passport and the difficulties which it has caused. Our decision is confined to considering the effect of those actions in an appeal of this nature.