PA/06378/2016

  • 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/06378/2016


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision and Reasons Promulgated
On 1 June 2017
On 10 October 2017



Before

Upper Tribunal Judge John FREEMAN

Between

N R a

appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr S Saeed, solicitor, Aman Solicitors Advocates
For the Respondent: Mr Chris Avery


DECISION AND REASONS


This is an appeal from Judge Sureta Chana, sitting at Hatton Cross on 8 December 2016, by someone who was born in Iraq in 1981. The appellant, after arriving in this country on a false passport for which she served a prison sentence, claimed asylum, and a crucial question in dealing with that claim was whether she would be returning to Iraq as a lone woman, in terms of the country guidance.

2. The grounds refer to the judge's findings at paragraph 48 where the judge says "however, the appellant is married with a child". When the judge recorded the evidence at paragraph 20 the appellant's evidence on the point is recorded in these terms, "she has an intention to marry him". The slightly unidiomatic phrase suggests a possible mistake, and that can be verified from the judge's very careful note, which shows this exchange in the course of cross-examination:

Q: What are your plans?
A: So far I have no intention of marrying him. He has not been married before.

3. It follows that what the judge actually wrote at paragraph 20 is a, no doubt unintentional, misrecording of that evidence, and may have been the basis for what she said at paragraph 48, which does not represent the evidence before her. In those circumstances both parties are agreed that there will have to be a fresh hearing before another first-tier judge, who will be able to make a clear finding on this point and decide, in terms of the current country guidance, whether the applicant does face any real risk on return as a result.

Appeal : first-tier decision set aside
Fresh hearing in First-tier Tribunal, not before Judge Chana



Date: 05/06/2017


(a judge of the Upper Tribunal)