PA/03266/2018

  • 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: PA/03266/2018


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Cardiff
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 8 August 2019
On 15 August 2019



Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LANE


Between

G B
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant is a citizen of Azerbaijan. He appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against a decision of the Secretary of State dated 22 February 2018 refusing his claim for international protection. The First-tier Tribunal, in a decision dated 18 February 2019, dismissed the appeal.
2. On 7 August, the Secretary of State submitted a Rule 24 notice stating that the respondent did not intend to oppose the appeal. Accordingly, the Duty Judge at Field House directed that the appeal be disposed of on the papers.
3. Both parties accept that the First-tier Tribunal failed to show in its decision that the evidence of the appellant had been treated as that of a vulnerable witness. I set aside the decision and direct that the decision be remade at or following a hearing de novo before the First-tier Tribunal at Newport on the first available date.
Notice of Decision
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside. None of the findings of fact shall stand. The appeal is returned to the First-tier Tribunal for that Tribunal to remake the decision at or following a hearing.


Signed Date 8 August 2019

Upper Tribunal Judge Lane




Direction Regarding Anonymity - Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

Unless and until a Tribunal or court directs otherwise, the appellants are granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify them or any member of their family. This direction applies both to the appellants and to the respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.