Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/11532/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Birmingham
Decision & Reasons promulgated
On 14 November 2016
On 25 November 2016

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HEMINGWAY

Between

AEE
(Anonymity DIRECTION CONTINUED)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr A Pipe (Counsel)
For the Respondent: Mr D Mills (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)

DECISION AND REASONS

1. This is the appellant's appeal to the Upper Tribunal from a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Row) promulgated on 4 February 2016, dismissing his appeal against the Secretary of State's decision of 11 August 2015 refusing to grant him asylum or any other form of international protection. I note in passing, though, that he has been granted limited leave to remain under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) on the basis of family life but that does not prevent him continuing to argue entitlement to international protection.
2. Permission to appeal was granted on 4 April 2016 and the Secretary of State subsequently filed a response to the appeal as provided for under rule 24 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008. In that response it was indicated that the appeal was not opposed. Further, the Secretary of State invited the tribunal to remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing.
3. The appeal was listed for a hearing before me. At that hearing both representatives urged me to follow the course of action suggested in that rule 24 reply. Both indicated that they were content for me to issue a decision with only limited reasons bearing in mind the agreement between them. In the circumstances, I will simply say that the grounds of application for permission to appeal have identified errors of law in the reasoning of the First-tier Tribunal such that its adverse credibility assessment is unsafe. In particular, I would accept, as contended in the first ground of appeal, that the First-tier Tribunal erred in wrongly concluding that the appellant had only produced documentary evidence of oppositionist involvement after his claim for asylum had been made bearing in mind that the Secretary of State had acknowledged, as noted at paragraph 25 of the reasons for refusal letter, he had produced some photographs of his presence on demonstrations in Brussels and a copy of a political manifesto (albeit untranslated from the French) which it was said had come into existence prior to the date of claim.
4. In light of the above, therefore, I do set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal, I preserve nothing from that decision and I remit to a differently constituted First-tier Tribunal for the decision to be re-made. The new First-tier Tribunal will make its own factual findings and reach its own conclusions stemming from those findings on the material before it.
Directions for the First-tier Tribunal
A. There will be a full re-hearing of the appeal. It will take place at the Birmingham hearing centre and will not involve Judge Row. The time estimate for the hearing shall be three hours. A French-speaking interpreter shall be provided for the benefit of the appellant.
B. Either party shall be at liberty to send to the First-tier Tribunal any further documentary evidence (including witness statements and background country material) upon which it intends to rely. However, any such documentation must be filed in sufficient time for it to be received by the First-tier Tribunal at least five working days prior to the date which will be fixed for the re-hearing. Such material should, simultaneously, be sent to the other party.
Decision
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error of law. That decision is set aside. The case is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal so that the decision may be re-made.

Signed: Date:

M R Hemingway
Judge of the Upper Tribunal

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 to both the Appellant and Respondent. Failure to comply could lead to contempt of court proceedings.

Signed: Date:

M R Hemingway
Judge of the Upper Tribunal

To the Respondent

Fee award

Since no fee is paid or payable there can be no fee award.

Signed: Date:

M R Hemingway
Judge of the Upper Tribunal