AA/00103/2016

  • Case title:  
  • Appellant name:
  • Status of case: Unreported
  • Hearing date:
  • Promulgation date:
  • Publication date:
  • Last updated on:
  • Country:
  • Judges:

The decision





Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/00103/2016

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Glasgow
Decision and Reasons Promulgated
on 20 January 2017
on 23 January 2017


Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MACLEMAN

Between

N M F
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Respondent

For the Appellant: Mr E MacKay, of McGlashan MacKay, Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr M Matthews, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The appellant appeals against a determination by Designated First-tier Tribunal Judge Murray, dismissing his appeal against refusal of recognition as a refugee from Sri Lanka.
2. The first and main point in the grounds is that the judge fell into error by reaching her adverse credibility conclusion in advance of and separately from considering the medical evidence, contrary to the principle set out in Mibanga v SSHD EWCA Civ 367.
3. The FtT refused permission, on the view that the judge did not proceed by rejecting the appellant's account first, then disregarding the medical report, but rather looked at all matters together; of necessity she set out conclusions in some form of order, but that did not necessarily mean that she decided one matter before another.
4. On renewal of the application, the UT granted permission.
5. In a rule 24 response dated 20 December 2016 the respondent conceded that there had been error of law such that a fresh hearing was required.
6. Representatives agreed that it was appropriate for that hearing to take place in the FtT.
7. The decision of the FtT is set aside. None of its findings are to stand, other than as a record of what was said on that occasion. The nature of the case is such that it is appropriate in terms of section 12(2)(b)(i) of the 2007 Act and of Practice Statement 7.2 to remit the case to the FtT for an entirely fresh hearing.
8. The member(s) of the FtT chosen to consider the case are not to include Judge Murray.
9. No anonymity direction has been requested or made.




20 January 2017
Upper Tribunal Judge Macleman