Chanda v The Secretary of State for the Home Department, Court of Appeal - Civil Division, October 31, 2018, [2018] EWCA Civ 2424

Resolution Date:October 31, 2018
Issuing Organization:Civil Division
Actores:Chanda v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWCA Civ 2424

Case No: C7/2017/1263 & A



Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)

UTJ Clive Lane


Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 31/10/2018

Before :




- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

M. M.Hossain (instructed by Direct Access) for the Appellant

Ben Keith (instructed by Government Legal Department) for the Respondent

Hearing date: Tuesday 23rd October 2018

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Lord Justice Coulson :

  1. Introduction

  2. This appeal raises an issue about paragraph 322(1A) of the Immigration Rules (concerned with false representations or false documents or information) and the separate considerations that arise out of a false document, on the one hand, and a finding of deception on the part of the applicant, on the other.

  3. The Factual Background

  4. On 16 October 2008, the appellant was granted leave to enter the UK as a student. That leave was extended until 15 October 2011. On 12 October 2011, he was granted leave to remain as Tier 1 (Post Study Migrant) until 12 October 2013 and, on 15 November 2013, was granted leave to remain as a Tier 4 (general) student until 9 May 2015.

  5. On 19 January 2015, the appellant applied for further leave to remain as a Tier 2 Skilled Worker migrant. This application relied, amongst other things, on a Degree Certificate, purportedly issued by University College London, and dated 26 July 2011. This referred to the appellant ``having completed the approved course of study and passed the examinations as an Internal Student in the Faculty of Science''. The degree was a Bachelor of Arts in Business Management.

  6. The respondent asked the University of London to verify the certificate. In a letter dated 20 March 2015 they responded:

    ``I would like to inform you of the copy of Certificate and Transcripts you have provided were not produced by the University of London Central Offices and bear a number of discrepancies when compared to authentic documents. I can therefore confirm that the documents are not genuine.

    We would like also to confirm that we cannot trace the above named individual as having graduated from the University of London.''

  7. As a result of this information, on 14 August 2015, the respondent refused the appellant's application for further leave to remain. The general grounds/reasons for refusal were stated as follows:

    ``As part of your application, you submitted a degree certificate and transcript for Bachelor of Arts in Business Management bearing your name which was purportedly issued by the University of London... I am satisfied that the documents are false because a representative of the University of London confirmed via email on 20 March 2015 that they had no records of you ever having graduated from the University of London and that the degree certificate in question was also false.

    As false documents have been submitted in relation to your application, it is refused under paragraph 3222(1A) of the Immigration Rules.

    For the above reasons, I am also satisfied that you have used deception in this application.

    This means that any future applications for entry clearance or leave to enter the UK you make will be refused under paragraph 320(7B) of the Immigration Rules (unless it would breach your rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 or the Refugee Convention)...''

  8. Accordingly, the respondent relied on two separate grounds when refusing leave to remain: the false document, and the additional finding of deception.

  9. The appellant appealed against that decision to the First Tier Tribunal (``FTT''). The hearing took place on 14 April 2016, although the appellant did not attend due to ill-health. By a decision dated 19...

To continue reading