AA/10291/2014

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

The decision


IAC-FH-CK-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/10291/2014


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 27 February 2017
Decision given orally at the hearing
On 9 March 2017




Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MCGEACHY

Between

AS
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Ms G Loughran, Counsel, instructed by Asylum Aid
For the Respondent: Ms A Fijiwala, Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant, a citizen of Afghanistan born in 1996, appeals with permission against a decision of Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Telford, who in a determination promulgated on 3 October 2016 dismissed the appellant’s appeal against a refusal of asylum.
2. The appellant had entered Britain in 2009 at the age of 13. He was granted leave to remain until the age of 17½ and then made a further application for leave to remain on asylum grounds. He appealed against the refusal of that application.
3. The judge had before him reports from two clinical psychologists relating to his mental health as well as one from his leaving car social worker. He does not appear to have engaged with these and in a very short determination dismissed the claim. Moreover, when considering the substance of the appellant’s asylum claim, although the judge states that he found that the appellant was not credible his reasoning for that conclusion and also his reasoning on the rights of the appellant under Article 8 was scant. The lack of reasoning was such that I consider that it amounts to an error of law and I therefore set aside the decision.
4. I consider that this is a case where insufficient findings of fact were made and following the Senior President of the Tribunal’s Practice Directions I conclude that it is appropriate that this appeal be remitted to the First-tier for a hearing afresh on all issues.

Notice of Decision
The appeal is allowed to the extent that the appeal is remitted to the First-tier for a hearing afresh on all issues.
Directions
1. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal at Hatton Cross.
2. Time estimate 3 hours.
3. Dari Interpreter
Direction Regarding Anonymity – Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008
Unless and until a Tribunal or court directs otherwise, the appellant is granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify him or any member of his family. This direction applies both to the appellant and to the respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.



Signed Date: 2 March 2017

Upper Tribunal Judge McGeachy