PA/02312/2016

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

The decision


IAC-FH-NL-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/02312/2016


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Bradford
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 6th February 2017
On 22nd February 2017


Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE D E TAYLOR


Between

Osman [S]
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr G Brown instructed by Parker Rhodes Hickmotts Solicitors
For the Respondent: Ms R Pettersen, Home Office Presenting Officer


DECISION AND REASONS
1. This is the appellant's appeal against the decision of Judge Batiste made following a hearing at Bradford on 7th November 2016.
2. The appellant is a citizen of Ethiopia. He applied for asylum in the UK, having arrived illegally, and was refused on 24th February 2016.
3. Amongst the papers before the judge was a document from the Office of Refugee Affairs, Republic of Sudan, namely a refugee ID card which was issued in accordance with Article 13 of the Convention by UNHCR under the Mandate Refugee Programme.
4. The judge said that he accepted that the appellant had had contact with UNHCR, and that he had come to their attention but he did not accept any other aspect of his claim.
5. Mr Brown submitted, and Mrs Pettersen accepted, that the judge had not dealt adequately with the UNHCR evidence. He relied on the decision in MM (Iran) v SSHD [2010] EWCA Civ 1457 which held that, given the UNHCR's particular expertise and responsibilities such a status should be given considerable weight by the Secretary of State and the Tribunal unless in any particular case the decision-maker concludes that there are cogent reasons not to do so.
6. The judge did not demonstrate that he had taken the proper approach to the UNHCR evidence. It was incumbent on him to do so. Accordingly, his credibility findings are flawed.
7. The decision is set aside. It is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal and should be heard by a judge other than Judge Batiste at Bradford on the next available date.


No anonymity direction is made.


Signed Date 21 February 2017

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Taylor