DA/00859/2012

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

The decision



Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00859/2012


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Determination Promulgated
On 11 June 2013


…………………………………


Before

LORD JUSTICE BURNS
SITTING AS JUDGE OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
&

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE D E TAYLOR


Between


RESHAPAN VALLIKANTHAN

Appellant
And


THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT


Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr M Param-Jorthy, Counsel, instructed by S Satha & Co.
For the Respondent: Ms M Tanner, HOPO


DECISION AND DIRECTIONS


1. This is the appellant’s appeal against the decision of First-tier tribunal Judge Del Fabbro and Mr J H Eames made following a hearing at Taylor House on the 25 January 2013, dismissing the appellant’s appeal against the decision of the respondent made on 17 October 2012 to refuse to grant him asylum in the UK and on 19 October 2012 to make a Deportation Order against him.

2. The appellant challenged the decision on the grounds that the judge had erred in his assessment of credibility generally and in particular in relation to his treatment of the medical evidence. Permission to appeal was granted on the basis that the judge had not properly engaged with the medical evidence and that his treatment of Dr Goldwyn’s opinion that the appellant bore scars which were diagnostic of a beating was flawed.

3. Although the initial response of the Secretary of State was to defend this determination, before us Ms Tanner sensibly and realistically acknowledged that the judge did not give sufficient reasons for placing no weight upon the Doctor’s opinion that the scars were corroborative of the appellant’s account, and did not resist the appellant’s case that this matter would have to be reheard.

4. The judge erred in law in not considering the medical evidence holistically in the context of the evidence as a whole, and his decision is set aside.

5. This appeal will be heard at Taylor House on the next available date after the promulgation of the forthcoming Country Guidance case, due imminently, so that the decision can be remade by a judge other than Judge Del Fabbro under 7.2 of the Senior President’s Practice Statement dated 25 September 2012 because of the nature and extent of the judicial fact finding which is necessary in order for the decision in the appeal to be remade.




Signed Date


Judge of the Upper Tribunal