BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments >> PA052932016 [2018] UKAITUR PA052932016 (17 January 2018) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2018/PA052932016.html Cite as: [2018] UKAITUR PA052932016, [2018] UKAITUR PA52932016 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/05293/2016
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
|
Heard at Field House |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
|
On 13 December 2017 |
On 17 January 2018 |
|
|
|
Before
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MCGEACHY
Between
Mohammad SALIM TAWFEEK Al-Mohammad
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Mr T Gaisford, of Counsel instructed by Messrs Seddons Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr N Bramble, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION AND DIRECTIONS
1. The appellant appeals with permission against a decision of Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Wedderspoon who, in a determination promulgated on 22 May 2017 dismissed the appellant's appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State to refuse to grant asylum and or humanitarian protection.
2. The basis of the appellant's claim was that he feared a Shia group in Baghdad. In the bundle of documents submitted there was a detailed expert report. The judge in his determination not only ignored the expert report but also other background evidence submitted and that I consider is a material error of law. Perhaps more importantly, however, is the fact that the judge appeared to believe that it was ISIS that the appellant feared when that was not the case. The judge referred to the appellant's fear of ISIS in paragraph 4 of the determination and again in his findings and conclusions at paragraph 36 he referred to an ISIS group. He did not engage with the fact that the appellant feared a Shia militia group either when he set out the basis of the appellant's claim or in his findings and conclusions. That again is a material error of law.
2. Following the Practice Directions of the Senior President of the Tribunal, I consider that it is appropriate that I remit this appeal for a hearing afresh in the First-tier on all issues.
Decision
This appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a hearing afresh on all issues. An Arabic interpreter required. Time estimate three hours.
No anonymity direction is made.
Signed Date: 10 January 2018
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge McGeachy
