Upper Tribunal orders deportation of Albanian convicted in Manchester cannabis farm after overturning judge's ruling

The Upper Tribunal has overturned a First-tier Tribunal decision that had allowed an Albanian national convicted in a major cannabis operation to remain in the United Kingdom, ruling the earlier judgment gave "patently inadequate" reasons and remaking the decision to dismiss his human rights appeal.

Roland Matranxhi, who was sentenced in June 2023 to four years and six months at Manchester Crown Court after being convicted of conspiring to produce cannabis, possessing cannabis with intent to supply and facilitating the acquisition, use or possession of criminal property, will now face deportation, the Upper Tribunal ruled. Police found large bags of cannabis at a Bolton address worth up to £200,000, along with £11,000 in cash and notebooks containing shopping lists for growing cannabis; officers had earlier seized around £1 million of cannabis in a related search.

The immigration dispute followed Matranxhi's conviction. The tribunal record states he entered the UK clandestinely in June 2018 and, just over two years later, applied for leave under the EU Settlement Scheme as the partner of an EEA national and was granted pre-settled status. After his conviction, the Home Office served a notice advising him of his liability to deportation in July 2023. Matranxhi responded the following February and in April was sent notice of a decision to deport after the Secretary of State refused his human rights claim.

Matranxhi appealed to the First-tier Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber, which allowed his appeal on the basis that he had met the threshold for "very compelling" circumstances that can, in exceptional cases, outweigh the public interest in deportation. The First-tier judge heard evidence from Matranxhi's partner, identified in the judgment as Miss Mareno, a Portuguese national who told the panel she would not move to Albania because she did not want to leave her sister, with whom she and Matranxhi live.

The First-tier judge said Miss Mareno was financially settled in the UK, worked in "responsible and professional employment," did not speak Albanian, and had no real ties in Albania. The judge accepted her evidence that forcing her to relocate would place "significant obstacles" on the couple and said it was "very likely" the relationship would dwindle away if Matranxhi were deported, describing the circumstances as "very compelling."

The Upper Tribunal, however, found errors in law and fact in the First-tier ruling. Upper Tribunal Judge Clive Lane said the earlier judge had "too readily" accepted Miss Mareno's evidence and had placed undue weight on the fact she lived with her sister. Judge Lane said the sisterly bond, while close, did not elevate the circumstances to the level of "very compelling" and did not override the strong public interest in deportation of a foreign national sentenced to four years or more in prison.

"The fact that they choose to live together is not unusual and, frankly, does not lift their circumstances on to a level which can reasonably be described as 'very compelling'," Judge Lane wrote, adding that Miss Mareno's unwillingness to part from her adult sister "does not constitute a very compelling circumstance which trumps the public interest in the appellant's deportation." The Upper Tribunal set aside the First-tier decision and remade the decision dismissing Matranxhi's appeal on human rights grounds.

Under immigration law, foreign criminals who receive a custodial sentence of at least four years are normally liable to deportation unless they can show very compelling circumstances that outweigh the public interest in removal. The Upper Tribunal's ruling returns the case to that legal benchmark, and Matranxhi will now be subject to deportation proceedings.

Matranxhi was jailed alongside his brother, Klodian Matranxhi, and a third defendant, Dashamir Rexhmati. The police described the arrests as part of an operation targeting people "setting up a cannabis farm." The Upper Tribunal judgment emphasised that the public interest in removing serious foreign criminals remains strong unless exceptional, well-substantiated reasons are shown to the contrary.