AA/09896/2014

• Status of case: Unreported
• Hearing date: 11 Aug 2016
• Promulgation date: 15 Aug 2016
• Publication date: 19 Jan 2018
• Last updated on: 19 Jan 2018

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/09896/2014


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Manchester
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 11th August 2016
On 15th August 2016




Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MARTIN

Between

MS FATOU MANNEH
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellant

and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Not present or represented
For the Respondent: Mr A McVeety (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)

DECISION AND REASONS

1. This is an appeal to the Upper Tribunal, with permission, by the Appellant in relation to a Decision and Reasons of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Nicol) promulgated on 16th April 2015.

2. The Appellant is a citizen of Gambia and her date of birth is [ ] 1990.


3. She arrived in the United Kingdom in July 2014 and claimed asylum in October 2014. The application was refused by the Secretary of State in a decision dated 17th November 2014.

4. The Appellant had arrived in the United Kingdom with the benefit of a visit visa granted so that she could visit her sister. She claimed asylum on the basis that she was a lesbian.

5. The Judge having heard evidence from the Appellant found that she had attempted to put herself in the best light by claiming to be a lesbian. He noted she changed her position when challenged about a man and moved to the position of being bisexual. He noted discrepancies in her interviews which had been noted in the Letter of Refusal and which he had set out in the Decision and Reasons. He rejected her account in its entirety and dismissed her asylum appeal.

6. The grounds asserted that the Judge had dismissed the entirety of the account as not credible but had not given the matter the anxious scrutiny required and had failed to consider the situation for gay people in the Gambia in that culture and the attitude of the Authorities. Secondly, it is asserted that the credibility findings were based on peripheral matters and thirdly, that the Judge made no findings in relation to her fears of becoming a victim of forced marriage.

7. The Secretary of State provided a Rule 24 response arguing that the Judge's findings, which start at paragraph 31 of the Decision and Reasons, give cogent reasons for rejecting the Appellant's claim. The Judge found that the Appellant's sister's evidence contradicted that of the Appellant in a key respect; namely where the Appellant claimed that her father had reported her to the Authorities in the Gambia and her sister was equally certain that he had not.

8. So far as the question of forced marriage is concerned the Secretary of State pointed out that the Judge had rejected the Appellant's claim in its entirety, which included her claim that she would be subjected to forced marriage.

9. The Appellant was represented by Counsel before the First- tier Tribunal. She is no longer represented. She did not attend the hearing before me.

10. I am satisfied that she was served with notice of the hearing at the address that she has provided to the Tribunal. There is neither explanation for her absence nor application for an adjournment. She did not attend to argue her case before the Upper Tribunal. In that event and having read the Decision and Reasons I find that the Judge rejected her claim in its entirety for reasons properly open to him and did not fall into error.



11. The Appellant's appeal to the Upper Tribunal is dismissed.

12. There was no application for an anonymity direction and I see no justification for making one.




Signed Date 12th August 2016


Upper Tribunal Judge Martin