IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM ACT 1999
THE IMMIGRATION SERVICES TRIBUNAL
APPEAL NO: IMS/2001/002/RTR
Between:
ROSECAL & CO
Appellant
and
THE IMMIGRATION SERVICES COMMISSIONER
Respondent
Before:
His Honour Judge S Cripps, President
Dr Susan Rowlands
Mr Martin Hoare
Sitting at 48/49 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JR
Hearing dates: 16th & 28th November 2001
Sent to parties: 28 November 2001
DECISION and REASONS, [RULE 24]
Background
Rosecal & Co, the appellant, applied for registration with the Immigration Services Commissioner, the respondent, by application dated 20th March 2001 enclosed with letter dated 10th April 2001. The respondent refused to register the appellant and set out his reasons in letter dated 4th October 2001.
The appellant appealed by Notice of Appeal dated 16 October 2001.
An application to suspend the respondent’s decision was heard on 26 October 2001.
The application was refused.
The appellant asked for the hearing of the appeal to be expedited.
Arrangements were made for the appeal to be heard on 16th November 2001.
By letter dated 13 November, The appellant applied for witness summons to be served on John Scampion, Kay Wilson White and Duncan Mackenzie Smith. The application was refused for reasons set out in letter dated 14 November.
The Hearing
The hearing commenced on 16th November 2001.
Mr Cal Harding represented the appellant.
Sean Wilken, of Counsel represented the respondent.
The appellant applied for an adjournment. The appellant argued that the recent service of documents and a witness statement by the respondent was contrary to a direction of the Tribunal under Rule 16, was too late and left no adequate time to consider and deal with the contents. The respondent contended that there was neither a breach of any direction nor a breach of any rule. Rules 17 and 18 allowed the respondent 42 days from acknowledgement of appeal to serve documents and those 42 days had not expired. We decided that no direction had been made and that the respondent was not in breach of any rule. The 42 days had not expired. We decided that the appellant should be allowed time to consider the documents.
We adjourned the hearing to 10.30 am Wednesday 28th November continuing, if necessary, on Thursday 29th November.
We made procedural directions that: -
witness statements be served by the appellant and the respondent on each other and on the Tribunal by 3pm Friday 23rd November and
paginated copies of any further documents relied on by the appellant or the respondent be served on each other and on the Tribunal by 3pm Friday 23rd November.
The appellant asked the Tribunal to invite John Scampion, Kay Wilson White and Duncan Mackenzie Smith to appear as witnesses in accord with Rule 17(2).
The appellant gave reasons why the Tribunal should issue such invitations.
We considered the matter. We decided that there was no good reason to invite any of those persons to give evidence.
The hearing resumed on Wednesday 28th November 2001.
Mr Cal Harding told us that the appellant had decided to withdraw the appeal. He told us of the appellant’s reasons for withdrawal.
We adjourned for a written Notice to be prepared in accordance with rule 23.
Written Notice was prepared and handed in by the appellant.
We then reconvened. The Notice was received and the appeal was withdrawn.
His Honour JUDGE Seddon CRIPPS