Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/07371/2017

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 23rd March 2018
On 02nd May 2018

Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ZUCKER

Between

B S (NEPAL)
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr A Miah, Counsel instructed by Imperium Group
Immigration Specialists
For the Respondent: Ms Z Ahmad, a Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

DECISION AND REASONS
1. Direction Regarding 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 their family. This direction applies both to the Appellant and to the Respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.
2. The Appellant is a citizen of Nepal whose date of birth is recorded as [ ] 1989. She sought international protection as a refugee. She appealed the decision of the Secretary of State of 12th July 2017 refusing her application both on international protection grounds and human rights grounds. In every material particular the judge found the Appellant lacking in credibility. I say that because at paragraph 24 of the Decision and Reasons, the judge stated, "I find the Appellant has failed to demonstrate to the low standard of proof that any aspect of her claim is capable of belief". The judge went on to consider Article 8 but did not specifically make reference to paragraph 276ADE(1)(vi) of the Immigration Rules.
3. Not content with the decision, by Notice dated 5th January 2018 the Appellant made application for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. On 7th February 2018 Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Grant-Hutchison granted permission thus the matter comes before me.
4. I have to say that when I read the decision I was at a loss to understand the basis upon which it would be contended that any failure on the part of the judge to consider paragraph 276ADE(1)(vi) could be material; the Appellant would have to establish that there were very significant obstacles to her integration into the country to which she would have to go. Since each of the aspects of her case had been rejected it was difficult to see the premise upon which it could be said that there were going to be any obstacles, indeed it occurred to me that had the judge gone on to find obstacles in the light of the findings the decision would have been capable of being attacked for perversity.
5. In VW (Sri Lanka) [2013] EWCA Civ 522 McCombe LJ at paragraph 12 said as follows:
"Regrettably, there is an increasing tendency in immigration cases when a First-tier Tribunal Judge has given a judgment explaining why he has reached a particular decision, of seeking to burrow out industriously areas of evidence that had been less fully dealt with than others and then to use this as a basis for saying the judge's decision is legally flawed because it did not deal with a particular matter more fully. In my judgment, with respect, that is no basis on which to sustain a proper challenge to a judge's finding of fact ?".
6. I entirely endorse his observations in this case.
7. This is an appeal that was, in my view, entirely without merit. I am surprised that permission was granted. It was only because permission was granted that I do not go on to consider whether a wasted costs order should not have been made.
DECISION
8. The appeal is dismissed.

ADDENDUM
9. I was specifically asked by Mr Miah to deal with paragraph 276ADE(1)(vi) and whether the judge should have dealt with it if only to dismiss it. If my reference to VW is not sufficient to explain my view on the point, it seems to me that once such clear findings have been made, as were in this case, there was really no reason at all for the judge to explore legal avenues which inevitably would fail.

Signed Date: 1 May 2018

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Zucker