AA/11308/2015

• Status of case: Unreported
• Hearing date: 16 Dec 2016
• Promulgation date: 20 Jan 2017
• Publication date: 12 Jul 2021
• Last updated on: 12 Jul 2021

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/11308/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Glasgow
Determination Promulgated
On 16 December 2016
On 20 January 2017


Before

MR C M G OCKELTON, VICE PRESIDENT
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DEANS

Between

M K
(Anonymity order made)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr G McGowan, Solicitor, Quinn, Martin & Langan
For the Respondent: Mrs M O'Brien, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS

1) This is an appeal against a decision by Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Fox dismissing an appeal on asylum and human rights grounds.

2) The appellant was born on 10 August 1989 and is a national of Iran. There were two grounds to his asylum claim. The first was that Sepah officials had confiscated his family's farm land. In a protest against this by his family and other villagers it was said that a soldier had been killed and the appellant was accused of his murder. The second ground was that the appellant claims to be at risk as a convert to Christianity.

3) The Judge of the First-tier Tribunal found the appellant's lacking in credibility in respect of both claims.

4) There were two grounds on which the appellant sought to challenge the judge's decision. The first of these was that there were a considerable number of errors in the decision. These had not been corrected by the judge by revising or proof reading the decision prior to its promulgation. This indicated that the judge had not given the case the scrutiny it should have received.

5) The second ground was that the judge had made certain errors in relation to the evidence. For example, the judge stated at paragraph 13 that the appellant was claiming to be a Pentecostal Christian but the evidence adduced by the appellant was not that the appellant was a Pentecostal Christian but that he was associated with an Evangelical Protestant Church. Criticism was made of paragraphs 28 and 29 of the decision, where the judge addressed the evidence of a witness from the appellant's church.

6) At the hearing before us Mrs O'Brien referred to a rule 24 response dated 15 September 2016 on behalf of the respondent. This accepted that there were some errors in the decision but it was not difficult to see what the judge was saying and there was no indication that there was any lack of clarity in the judge's understanding of the appellant's case. The judge made credibility findings which were open to him. Mrs O'Brien acknowledged that having examined the decision she found it difficult to support these submissions in their entirety. Not only were the typographical errors damaging to the decision but there was uncertainty over the findings made by the judge in relation to the appellant's claimed conversion to Christianity. Having discussed the issue with Mr McGowan for the appellant, both sides had agreed that the proper course would be to remit the appeal to the First-tier Tribunal for a hearing before a different judge.

7) For our part we were concerned that the findings made by the Judge of the First-tier Tribunal for not accepting the appellant's claimed conversion, particularly at paragraphs 28 and 29 of the decision, seemed to be based on reasons which were less than adequate. We agreed that the proper course was for the appeal to be heard again.

Conclusions

8) The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of errors on points of law.

9) The decision is set aside.

10) The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be re-made at a hearing before a different judge with no findings preserved.

Anonymity

11) The Judge of the First-tier Tribunal did not make an order for anonymity. As the appeal is to be reheard, we consider it appropriate that an order should be made at least on an interim basis to preserve the anonymity of the appellant until such time as his appeal is determined. Accordingly unless and until a Tribunal court orders otherwise, the appellant is granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify him or any witness in these proceedings. This order applies to both the appellant and to the respondent. Failure to comply with this order could lead to contempt of court proceedings.





Signed Date

Upper Tribunal Judge Deans