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 >> UI2024000902 [2024] UKAITUR UI2024000902 (11 September 2024) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2024/UI2024000902.html Cite as: [2024] UKAITUR UI2024000902 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
A black and white emblem with lions and unicorns
Description automatically generated
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IMMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER |
Case No: UI-2024-000902 |
|
First-tier Tribunal No: PA/53182/2023 LP/00057/2024 |
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Decision & Reasons Issued:
On 11 September 2024
Before
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PARKES
Between
MMO
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Appellant
and
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation:
For the Appellant: Ms S Khan (Counsel, instructed by Fisher Stone Solicitors)
For the Respondent: Mr A Tan (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)
Heard at Field House on 2 nd September 2024
Order Regarding Anonymity
Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the Appellant is granted anonymity.
No-one shall publish or reveal any information, including the name or address of the appellant, likely to lead members of the public to identify the appellant. Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court .
DECISION AND REASONS
1. The Appellant, a citizen of Iran, claimed asylum on the 17 th of November 2021, his claim was rejected for the reasons given in the Refusal Letter of the 9 th of May 2023. The Appellant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal, his appeal was heard by Judge Lester at Newport on the 2 nd of February 2024 and dismissed for the reasons given in the decision promulgated on the 7 th of February 2024.
2. The Appellant sought permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal in grounds of the 9 th of February 2024. In summary the grounds argue that the Judge erred in his treatment of the medical evidence amounting to a procedural irregularity, the Judge questioned the expertise of the Dr without raising that with the Appellant. It is also argued that the Judge did not take the medico-legal report into account when assessing the Appellant's credibility and failed to assess the risk to the Appellant at the pinch-point on return. Permission was granted by Judge Saffer on all grounds on the 6 th of March 2024.
3. The Appellant's Upper Tribunal hearing was conducted with the representatives attending remotely, there were no technical issues. At the hearing Mr Tan for the Secretary of State indicated that the Respondent accepted that the grounds were made out and that the Judge had erred as the grounds argued. Accordingly, it was accepted that the decision of Judge Lester had to be set aside.
4. It was agreed by the parties that the appeal should be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for re-hearing de novo with no findings preserved, not before Judge Lester. A Kurdish Sorani interpreter is required for the hearing.
Notice of Decision
5. This appeal is allowed, the decision of Judge Lester set aside and the appeal remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for re-hearing.
Judge Parkes
Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber
Dated: 2 nd September 2024