AA/10391/2014

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

The decision


IAC-AH-CJ-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/10391/2014


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 23 March 2017
On 30 March 2017



Before

DR H H STOREY
JUDGE OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL


Between

mr BilaL Mussaoui
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr I Palmer, Counsel instructed by Barnes Harrild & Dyer Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr I Jarvis, Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND DIRECTIONS

1. The appellant, a national of Algeria, has permission to challenge the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge (FtTJ) Andonian sent on 22 June 2016 dismissing the appellant’s appeal against a decision of the respondent refusing his claim for asylum.

2. It is unnecessary to go into detail regarding the grounds since both parties agree that the judge erred in law. The judge’s attention was expressly drawn to the report of the Consultant Psychiatrist Dr Heller who had stated that the appellant was a highly vulnerable person and should be treated as a vulnerable witness. He was invited to so treat him in accordance with the Joint Presidential Guidance Note No. 2 of 2010: Child, vulnerable adult and sensitive appellant guidance. Not only did the judge not refer to this guidance but he failed to indicate any reasons why when assessing the appellant’s credibility he should not take into account that he was a vulnerable witness. Nor anywhere does the judge note the potential significance of the fact that the appellant, although now an adult, was recounting events that had happened to him as a minor, with a child’s memory.

3. Nor is there any indication in the decision that the judge weighed in the balance when assessing credibility of the expert report of Dr Seddon which found the appellant’s account plausible and consonant with the country information in a number of respects. He referred to this report in paragraph 12 but failed to go on to evaluate it or explain why he rejected it.

4. These are but two major flaws in a determination which has several passages that are somewhat opaque. Leaving aside all other matters raised in the grounds (which include an allegation that the judge fell asleep in the latter part of the hearing), I entirely concur with the representatives in adjudging that the judge’s decision is vitiated by legal error and is to be set aside.

5. I also agree with both parties that the judge’s error was such that none of his findings can be preserved. Accordingly, I remit the case to be heard by the First-tier Tribunal before a judge other than FtTJ Andonian.

No anonymity direction is made.



Signed Date: 26 March 2017


Dr H H Storey
Judge of the Upper Tribunal