AA/02342/2015

  • 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/02342/2015


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Manchester
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
Given extempore on 28 November 2016
Signed and sent to Promulgation
on 5th December, 2016.
On 6th December 2016


Before

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley


Between

Mazza [A]
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Ms Logan of counsel
For the Respondent: Mr McVeatie a Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS

1. The appellant in this appeal is a citizen of Sudan born on 26 May 1977.

2. She claimed asylum in the basis that she would face mistreatment in Sudan due to her imputed political opinion, because she helped a political youth group by allowing them to use her laboratory. Her application to the respondent was dismissed and on 27 January 2015 served notice of refusal of leave to enter the United Kingdom.

3. The appellant subsequently appealed against the respondent's decision and her appeal was heard in Manchester by First-tier Tribunal G D Tobin on 17 February 2016.

4. The judge dismissed the appeal, but in doing so failed to make any findings in respect of the evidence of a Mr Alabas, who gave oral evidence to the judge on behalf of the appellant. The appellant's grounds of appeal also allege that the judge failed to take into account the background evidence placed before him on the appellant's behalf.

5. I do not believe there to be any merit in that claim that the judge failed to take into account the background evidence before making the decision, since at paragraph 10 of the judge's determination, the judge clearly indicates that he has read all the documents prior to commencing the hearing of the case and in paragraph 24 his reference to journalists, editors and newspaper proprietors having been arrested, demonstrates that he clearly has considered the background evidence.

6. However his failure to deal with the oral evidence he heard from Mr Alabas does amount to an error on a point of law. It is by no means clear what the oral evidence of Mr Alabas was. In the circumstances, and with the consent of the representative's, I have decided that the most appropriate course of action is for me to set aside the judge's decision and to remit this appeal for hearing afresh by the First-tier Tribunal. An Arabic interpreter will be required and two hours should be allowed for the hearing of the appeal.

Notice of Decision

I set aside the judge's decision and to remit this appeal for hearing afresh by the First-tier Tribunal.


Richard Chalkley
Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley Date: 6th December 2016