Ajmal & Hooi v Secretary of State for the Home Department (new matter - "considered" - Reg 9(6)(b))
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
The appellants argue that a new matter should be considered under Regulation 9(6)(b).
What the court decided
The Upper Tribunal held that a matter is a "new matter" under regulation 9(6) of the Immigration (Citizens' Rights Appeals) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 only if it both satisfies regulation 9(6)(a) and has not been "previously considered" under regulation 9(6)(b). "Considered" means the matter was the subject of deliberate thought by the SSHD in the context of either the decision appealed against or a section 120 statement; the test is whether the SSHD in fact deliberately thought about the evidence or arguments, judged on the facts and Home Office correspondence. Applying this, each appellant's Article 8 claim was a new matter that had not been previously considered, so without the SSHD's consent the First-tier Tribunal had no jurisdiction to determine it. Both appeals were therefore dismissed.
Categories
Authoritative link
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.